Can Columbia Tackle its Bias Problems?

An article in the New York Times today doesn't give me much hope that Columbia can solve its bias problems.

As you might know, many students have complained about anti-Israel bias in Columbia's Middle East studies program. They have actually made a short video of their complaints, and the University has set up a panel to investigate.

But, look at this quote from the article.....before the panel has reported:

Although Mr. Bollinger did not comment last night on what the report is likely to say, he said it was "simply preposterous to characterize Columbia as anti-Semitic or as having a hostile climate for Jewish students and faculty."

That doesn't sound too promising.

And, look at this quote:

He also rejected the "academic bill of rights" proposed by David Horowitz, a conservative activist, that, he said, calls for a plurality of methodologies and perspectives in both hiring and curricula - a proposal some state legislators are considering.

"We should not accept the idea that the remedy for lapses is to add more professors with different political points of view, as some would have us do," Mr. Bollinger said. "The notion of a balanced curriculum, in which students can, in effect, select and compensate for bias, sacrifices the essential norm of what we are supposed to be about in a university. It's like saying of doctors in a hospital that there should be more Republicans, or more Democrats. It also risks polarization of the university, where liberals take courses from liberal professionals and conservatives take conservatives classes."

What he wants, obviously, is all students taking courses from liberal professors.