Even if you resolve fraud, you still fail to resolve the driver of the fraud, which is money. There are basically 3 sources of funding for universities - gover

Even if you resolve fraud, you still fail to resolve the driver of the fraud, which is money. There are basically 3 sources of funding for universities - government, military, corporations. These 3 have aligned interests. Where their interests align (or are not in conflict) you will have funding of one side only. If you fund one side only, you will generate lots of information to support whatever-it-is, but this will fail to be a fair representation of the issue. I'll just run through a simple, silly example. If I wanted to prove cats cause stormy weather, I could fund say, 10 studies. Perhaps 2 are supportive (cats and storms correlate in some way). I can then fund even more studies in that direction. I would soon have a huge body of supportive data .. but I haven't said anything meaningful, I haven't got to the truth of the matter. I just have a huge body of evidence. To me, this is chicken feed. It's not that the information is a lie necessarily, it's just that it's isn't important. Nevertheless, the body of data can be referred to, in order to help steer public opinion. Everyone is getting paid, the thing is true .. what's to be upset about? Anyway, whoever has the money determines the outcome. Truth is a secondary consideration.