Jason Arday resigns his professorship at Cambridge

August 6, 2026 • 6:30 am

As I reported two days ago, Cambridge sociology professor Jason Arday was the subject of several reports of unethical behavior as well as fabulism.  Yesterday he resigned his position at The University of Cambridge after there were multiple credible accusations of plagiarism in his Ph.D. thesis and his scholarly papers (which didn’t seem so scholarly). He also told unbelievable tales about his life, including having raised £5 million pounds for charity, of having run 30 marathons in 35 days, and of having been threatened when there was no evidence of the reported threats. He sicced the police on journalists inquiring about his life, and blamed all the inquiries and criticism on racism.  He said that he was diagnosed as autistic when young, did not speak until he was 11 years old, and could not read or write until he was 18.

The pressure on Arday grew sufficiently intense, and the accusations so numerous, that Cambridge finally announced they were investigating him. In light of this and other mounting investigations, he quit his job (see his resignation letter below); all this is reported in the New York Times (here and here; links free, h/t Keith) and the Guardian. His autobiography, scheduled to appear this coming week, is apparently still in the works, but I suspect it will be withdrawn. From the NYT:

His resignation came hours after Cambridge announced an investigation into Arday, and six days before the scheduled release of his memoir “Great and Unfortunate Things,” by the Simon & Schuster imprint 37 Ink, in the United States.

A representative of Simon & Schuster, which has so far stood by the book, told The New York Times on Wednesday that the publisher had no comment beyond the statement about Arday it released last week, citing “the professionalism and integrity he has brought to every stage of the publication.”

Arday, true to form, did not admit any fabulism or guilt in his resignation letter posted at the GoodLaw Project:

Dear colleagues,

It is with profound sadness that I write to resign, with immediate effect, from my position at the University of Cambridge and Jesus College.

When I accepted the extraordinary honour of becoming Professor of Sociology at Cambridge, it was, without question, the greatest professional privilege of my life. To become the youngest Black professor in the University’s history was something I could scarcely have imagined as a child growing up with a diagnosis of autism, unable to speak until I was eleven years old.

The response from so many people across the world was overwhelming. Thousands celebrated not simply my appointment, but what it represented: that talent, perseverance and hope can triumph over even the greatest adversity. It has been the privilege of my life to teach my students, to learn alongside them, and to witness their curiosity, kindness and ambition. They have given me far more than I could ever have given them.

Sadly, the years since my appointment have also been marked by an unrelenting level of public scrutiny and personal attack. While criticism is an inevitable part of academic life, what I have experienced has gone far beyond scholarly disagreement. The relentless accusations, speculation and public commentary have taken a profound toll on me and on those I love.

I have tried to continue because I believe deeply in the values of higher education, in rigorous scholarship, and in the transformative power of universities. I have tried because of my students, my colleagues and the countless people who have written to tell me that my journey gave them hope.

But there comes a point when the personal cost becomes too great.

I have a family. I want to be present for them. I want to reclaim some peace, some privacy and some semblance of an ordinary life. I no longer wish to feel as though I am living under a constant spotlight, where every aspect of my life is subject to public examination and judgement.

For my own wellbeing, for my family, and for those who have stood by me throughout this difficult period, I have concluded that the only way to bring this chapter to an end is to step away.

This decision should not be interpreted as a loss of faith in scholarship or in the values that first brought me to Cambridge. Nor should it be mistaken for an acceptance of the narratives that have surrounded me. It is simply the decision of someone who has reached the limits of what any person should reasonably be expected to endure.

To my students: thank you. Teaching you has been the greatest honour of my academic career. Your brilliance, compassion and determination give me enormous hope for the future.

To my colleagues and to the many thousands of people, from every corner of the world, who have supported me, defended me, written to me, and believed in me when it mattered most, I offer my deepest gratitude. Your kindness has carried me through some of the darkest moments of my life.

This is not the end of my work. It is simply the end of this chapter.

I need time to heal. I need time to simply be  myself again.

And when that time comes, I will return.

I will return stronger, wiser and with the same determination that has always defined my journey. There is still so much work to do, and I look forward to doing it alongside so many of you in the years ahead.

For now, however, I ask only for understanding, for compassion, and for the space to begin again.

With gratitude,
Professor Jason Arday

Again, he admits no guilt, but implies that “relentless accusations”, which he’d always attributed to racism or ableism, had made his life at Cambridge Uni intolerable.  I feel a bit sorry for the guy, for, after all, his rise was promoted by people who bought into the oppressor/victim narrative. But he himself is responsible for telling apparently false stories about his academic career and life, and for stealing from other scholars. As I said, Arday’s meteoric rise, as well as the many people who defended him in light of credible accusations, constitute an insult to reputable black and minority scholars everywhere.

I doubt Arday will return to academics, for what university would hire him? He is tainted permanently, and the plagiarism and statements about his life are there for all to see. Let this be a lesson to Cambridge to hire solely on the basis of merit rather than to tick an identity box.

Here’s the take of philosopher Maarten Boudry; read the whole thing, and watch the video at the end:

27 thoughts on “Jason Arday resigns his professorship at Cambridge”

    2. Prompts to GPT-5.4-mini:

      1. [Reword] the following “voluntary” resignation letter by a grifter whose lies and plagiarisms had become obvious. Use [language] that a PROUD conman would use when he got exposed, which focus on the carelessness and stupidity of the suckers he conned, who (in his view) brought it on themselves. Make it fun.
      2. Very smug, with enough OTT to make it entertaining:
      3. More critical of those who were conned

      The result:

      Dear colleagues,

      It is with the sort of grave composure usually reserved for bad public relations and worse judgement that I resign, with immediate effect, from my position.

      When I arrived, many were delighted to be seen as enlightened, generous, and impeccably progressive for having applauded so loudly and so early. A remarkable number seemed far more interested in the symbolism of my appointment than in the tiresome business of checking whether the symbol was, in fact, up to the job. It was all rather convenient: the story was irresistible, the praise was cheap, and the scrutiny apparently optional.

      The reaction from across the world was, I admit, impressive in its fervour. People celebrated not merely an appointment, but their own willingness to be swept along by a flattering tale. One can hardly blame them entirely; enthusiasm is often much easier than discernment. Still, there is something exquisitely revealing about a crowd that mistakes its own applause for due diligence.

      The years since have brought the inevitable correction. Questions, doubts, and awkward facts have a regrettable habit of appearing after the champagne has been poured. The trouble, of course, is not simply that criticism exists, but that so many preferred to treat scepticism as vulgar and accountability as a nuisance. It is difficult to maintain a grand narrative when someone insists on reading the footnotes.

      I have no wish to linger under a spotlight that has become, for some, less a tool of understanding than a theatre of public embarrassment. I am therefore stepping away, leaving behind those who were so eager to believe exactly what they wanted, precisely when they wanted it.

      To my students: thank you for your kindness, even if the institution around you proved a little less demanding of truth than it might have been.

      To my colleagues and supporters: your loyalty was touching, though in some cases perhaps better directed towards basic standards of verification.

      This is not an end, merely the moment when fantasy meets administration.

      With measured regret,

      Reply

  2. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I guess the people that hired him really believe they are doing the right thing. Why else would they subject his students to the experiences they will get with his instruction?

    Reply

  3. I have little doubt that Arday will land on his feet. He will be given invitations to speak, with large fees, a book contract or two, etc.

    But like the scandal itself, Arday is not of primary importance. The university (overall, not just Cambridge) system is the scandal, with its willingness to promote people clearly unworthy of the jobs.

    Another scandal is the fields that promote such people: the {fill in the blank} studies and cultures programs, as well as the deconstructive literature and philosophy departments, the current mode of sociology and archeology—all of those subject in which papers can be published with gobbledegook making no sense in the style of Judith Butler. All of those departments can hire and promote pseudointellectuals who, if they have any ideas, are not capable of presenting them.

    Some of our colleagues have wondered why such people do not exist in real university science departments: biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc. The answer is simple: even if hired, people are expected to produce papers with serious scientific inquiry, with hypotheses testing, analysis, etc., all in a form that is understandable and subject to criticism by their colleagues. It is not an easy job: many good scientists fail because of an inability to do one aspect of that work. So it’s not a job that beckons to charlatans; ask any assistant professor in the sciences how many hours he or she is expected to spend at work during his or her first few years of employment. IMO, one doesn’t do it for money or prestige—there are easier ways to get both. The only reason (again, IMO) to become a university scientist is the freedom that the job gives to pursue the questions about which one is curious.

    If that sort of employment rigor was extended, in some form, to other university disciplines, academic charlatanism would becom much more rare.

    Reply

    1. Some of our colleagues have wondered why such people do not exist in real university science departments: biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc. The answer is simple: even if hired, people are expected to produce papers with serious scientific inquiry.

      I agree with you of course. Even more to the point, (almost all) scientists are expected to produce data. Arday’s “data” were transcribed interviews of other black scholars describing their experiences in the academy. Some of his data were fraudulent: he recycled quotations from interviews that he copied ~verbatim from other interviews in other studies by other scholars, or that he recycled from his own journal articles but ascribed to different interview subjects with changed demographics (sex, ethnicity).

      I wonder if fake data might have been the bridge too far even for Hilary Cremin at Cambridge. One would love to know what his famous scientist supporters like Simon Baron-Cohen thought of that transgression.

      “Once it became clear Arday had taken a quote harvested by another researcher and published it as his own quote from his own interview, all bets were off, because it opened the door to him having fabricated basically anything he published.”

      https://x.com/jessesingal/status/2085120574641103131

      Reply

  4. Jason Arday stays true to himself. He does not create anything, but instead passes off the work of others (in this case, an AI) as his own.

    Colin Wright
    @SwipeWright

    🚨BREAKING: Jason Arday, the Cambridge professor exposed for plagiarism and fabricating major aspects of his life story, has resigned.

    According to leading AI writing detection software Pangram, Arday’s resignation letter is “Fully AI Generated” with “High Confidence.”

    https://x.com/SwipeWright/status/2085090552731570261

    Reply

  5. Excellent take by Maarten Boudry. That this guy got hired in the first place just boggles the mind. My husband (a working class kid who got to Oxford by way of the UK’s now cancelled direct grants) had another valid rant about Arday/Cambridge – imagine, as a parent, you and your kids have worked your butts off for years to get into a prestigious institution like Cambridge only to find them being taught by a clown like Arday. Arday’s shouldn’t be the only head that rolls.

    Reply

  6. One question about Arday that has not been brought up is if he supervised graduate students, as full professors are normally required to do. One wonders if anyone received his/her Ph.D. From the guy, and how he or she must feel about all of this—not to mention the validity of the Ph.D. Itself.

    Cambridge has a lot to answer for.

    Reply

  8. Jason Arday apparently had two duties as a professor at Cambridge:

    Be a person of color
    Mouth the correct ideological dogma

    That is all he was hired for and all that has ever been expected of him. That’s why the nice white lady who hired him, Hilary Cremin, gushed that he was “the best in the world at this”…..”this” being a token and pet for the University. With his dreadlocks, pitiful backstory and charm, he truly was the best in the world at “this”.

    Jason should be looked at as a bauble for the the likes of Cremin and her similarly enlightened white colleagues, not an actual functioning professor. They could display the bauble to others as evidence of their virtue.

    Once seen in this light, the protective response of Cambridge and all of those who circled the wagons around him makes perfect sense. And…while Arday deserves a lot of blame for this, I’d argue that people like Cremin deserve even more. https://faculty.educ.cam.ac.uk/people/staff/cremin

    Why is Hilary Cremin not under investigation?

    Reply

    1. I had not thought so. My guess was that Arday would huddle up with Cremin and others at Cambridge, the university investigation would be a whitewash, and together they would brazen it out. Genuinely surprised that he resigned.

      Reply

        1. Odds are that Cremin and the other Cambridge bauble collectors saw a
          threat that their role in the Prof. Arday hoax might be looked into —and therefore pressured him to bail out.

          Reply

          1. An article in The Times (of London, England) contained this passage (bolding added):

            [His resignation] followed Cambridge launching an investigation because it said new information had emerged about his “academic qualifications and honorary appointments”. The investigation will continue despite his resignation.

            https://archive.ph/k280E

  10. Glasgow and Durham must be thanking their lucky stars that they managed to pass the parcel before the music stopped — though the brevity of his passage through their institutions, mere stepping stones to what he thought was his final destination, had everything to do with Arday’s hubris and ambition, and nothing to do with their own perspicacity.

    Reply

      2. Jeff, he was a prof at the University of Glasgow between 2021 and 2023. But after he left, he did not have the status of Visiting Professor at the University of Glasgow. See here: (article from The Times, London, England, Aug 5, 2026)
        https://archive.ph/RvimX

        Reply

  11. I was going to fell sorry for the guy, but then he just carries on telling fabulous stories.
    Didn’t speak until 11? He would have had an IEP, or whatever the equivalent was at the time – let us see it. Unable to read and write until 17? The passed his degree within seven years? There will be documents for that as well.
    He seems to have worked out how to game the system very well.

    Reply

  12. Claims of racism are correct, but misdirected. The true racists are those who allowed Arday to be judged by softer standards than others, in effect saying that a POC can’t be expected to meet the same degree of rigor as a non-POC.

    But then again, I’m an engineer, and I can’t imagine any of my POC coworkers making an error on a structural analysis calculation and blaming racism when the error is pointed out.

    Reply

  13. The man was clearly a narcissist and most likely sufficiently severe to be classified as having a personality disorder. His being a full professor so quickly was undeserved. With so few years as a faculty member, he should have been a senior assistant or junior associate at most. His fakery & white guilt will only make the future success of qualified Black academics more difficult.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *