That’s an interesting comparison. I think there are similarities - the main one being that people allowed themselves to be gullible because they wanted it to be true, and so didn’t bother themselves with the evidence.This story has somehow(????) completely passed me by until today but now I'm all in on Professor Billy buller.
In some ways he reminds me a bit of Elizabeth Holmes, the Theranos fraudster (although I'm not suggesting he's done anything criminal), but she also had a lot of famous, distinguished people and institutions eating out of the palm of her hand by a combination of grandiosity, blatant lies and leaning on claims of discrimination, albeit sexism in her case.
With Elizabeth Holmes, all those powerful men she had on her board etc. were supporting her because they desperately wanted to be “in” on the first female self-made billionaire out of Silicon Valley. (And there was an element of old white men being flattered by the attention of a young blonde as well.) They didn’t look closely enough at whether the technology she was pushing could actually do the job. Or was real at all, as it turned out.
With Arday, it seems like they really wanted the youngest Black professor, because they decided it was politically expedient / good marketing for their university - and they didn’t look too closely at whether he was actually up to the job.