The University administration is considering what action to take in response to the article "Voodoo Academics: Brandeis University's hard lesson in the real economy" published in the November issue of Harper's Magazine about University capital projects. It allegedly contains factual inaccuracies, is "insulting" to the Brandeis community and is allegedly biased due to a conflict of interests on the part of the article's author, according to an Oct. 22 e-mail from University President Jehuda Reinharz to faculty. "We recognize that the legal process for slander/defamation is an arduous task and one that is difficult to prove; however, we feel that some affirmative course of action must be taken to protect the reputation of Brandeis given that this article is likely to have circulation on the Internet far beyond the circulation numbers of Harper's," Reinharz wrote.

In the Harper's article, the author, Christopher R. Beha, criticized the University's multiple capital projects campaigns as unnecessary and stated that they contributed to the University's financial difficulties. Writing that the University's campus expansion is "growth for growth's sake" in order to compete with other institutions, Beha added that "such capital projects have become an essential element in the marketing ritual of college admissions."

Beha also attributed the higher cost of Brandeis' tuition, compared to those of other schools, to the number of capital projects the school has undertaken. Comparing $11,000 in-state school tuition to $39,000 in Brandeis tuition, he wrote that "what that $28,000 surcharge buys-the financial and social return on a degree from an elite private university-cannot be found in a classroom."

Reinharz's e-mail also states that Beha "openly admitted" that he got the idea for the article from conversations with his aunt, Ann Beha, the founder of an architectural firm that unsuccessfully sought employment by the University in connection with the plans for the new fine arts center in 2004. Reinharz writes that "according to [Vice President of Capital Projects] Dan Feldman's recollection, Ann Beha made derogatory comments to [Feldman] that implied that Brandeis had demonstrated a lack of judgment and made a poor decision in not hiring her."

Beha said he did not "openly admit" a connection between his choice of article topic and his aunt as stated by Reinharz in the e-mail. "It is simply not true that I admitted such a thing, and I would not have admitted such at thing because it is further not true that my interest in Brandeis stemmed from anything involving my aunt," Beha said

Feldman provided the Justice with copy of an e-mail in which he asked Beha whether he and Ann Beha were related after he recognized the uncommon last name. In an e-mail reply dated Aug. 31, Beha wrote that "I am indeed [related to her]. She is my aunt, and we're quite close. In fact, some conversations with her led me to be interested in looking into institutional expansions."

Beha emphasized in an interview with the Justice that he believed allegations about the article were unfounded.

"I don't mind getting banged around for this at all. I wrote an article that was tough on them," he said. "But I find it seriously distasteful that [the administration] would bring my aunt into this when she had nothing to do with this whatsoever."

Beha further said that he did not think any allegations of defamation against him would stand.

He also said that he had not spoken to his aunt about Brandeis until he was under way with the article and that he was not aware that she had had any professional involvement with the University.

"The allegations and inferences in the Presidents [sic] email regarding me and my firm are untrue," Ann Beha wrote in an e-mail to the Justice. "I'm writing to [Reinharz] to respond vigorously."

Feldman said that "given that she was quite upset when she was rejected and then was having conversations with her nephew about writing an article about capital projects at Brandeis, you have to at least think that this is problematic."

Senior Vice President of Communications Andrew Gully said in an interview with the Justice that "whether there is formal action taken against [Beha] or what form it would take is still . under discussion."

The current focus, Gully said, is "to make sure that the University has the accurate details out in [the article]". He said the University has had no contact with Beha since the publication of the article.

Reinharz and Thomas Reilly, the University's outside legal counsel did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Reinharz's e-mail alleges that Beha expressed his interest in writing the article to Feldman at the end of August, but that he subsequently did not conduct interviews with Brandeis administrators.

Reinharz wrote that the University next heard about the article at the beginning of September when a fact-checker from Harper's got in touch with the University to confirm inaccurate figures that had circulated online and in news sources in January.

Reinharz's e-mail states that Beha did not incorporate the corrected figures into his article that former Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Peter French provided during the fact-checking process.

Both Reilly and French sent letters to the editors of Harper's asking for the article to be held or printed with correct information, Reinharz wrote.

Feldman also said that the "reporter didn't take the trouble to reach out to us and try and get accurate information, learn the facts, understand the basis for all the capital projects here. . None of that entered into the article at all."

However, Beha said that he had used the corrected numbers that French had sent.

"Really what [Reinharz is] saying is [that] he doesn't like the spin I put on some numbers or he thinks I am mischaracterizing some things, but in fact he says there is no fact in the piece that I got wrong. He just doesn't like the fact pattern, so to speak, and that is his prerogative," Beha said.

Reinharz expressed particular displeasure with Beha's comments about Brandeis tuition.

"Our students year after year talk about the outstanding quality of their educational experiences at Brandeis and the exceptional and world class faculty here. My view is that these more than justify the expense of a Brandeis education," he wrote.

Feldman said in an interview with the Justice that Beha shows no understanding of capital projects plans at Brandeis in the article.

Feldman emphasized that capital projects in the past 10 years have been in response to pressing needs on campus for a campus center in a central location, a science center that is able to support research and teaching and more housing for upperclassmen in response to a growing housing shortage.

"The quality of the institution had in so many ways outstripped the quality of the facilities" 10 years ago, he said. "All of those [capital projects] are essential; they are consistent with needs identified in the campus master plan."

Feldman said that although the buildings are of a very high quality, "it's not about just making a show."

"A letter to the editor might not be as emotionally satisfying as a libel lawsuit, but it is a more direct and reliable method for setting the record straight," Prof. Eileen McNamara (AMST), who teaches a class called "Ethics in Journalism" and is a former reporter for the Boston Globe, wrote in an e-mail to the Justice. "Factual errors and distortions, no matter how cavalierly made, constitute shoddy journalism certainly. But libel? Much harder to prove."



-Hannah Kirsch and Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting.