"Nobody is waterboarding the money down their throat. They can say no. The actual question is: why don't they?"

Leaving aside that metaphor, the obvious answer is that they either like or need it. Most likely the former, because many of these well known universities are swimming in money already.

Why would they not accept money to do something they are interested in doing?

What is the downside to the school of a nicer student union or a public policy/international relations campus in the nation's capital?

Because that's not what the GP was talking about. For example, say there is some controversial economic policy passed by one of the parties. Then a researcher goes out to research if the policy is working or not. But when they do the research, they find out that the policy doesn't work and has bad side effects too. However, the majority of the university votes and supports the party that passed the policy.

So the researcher intentionally changes some of the ways the data is collected and poof, it looks like the policy works. Extra funding comes your way but now you have committed academic fraud. Not that anything will happen to you for this, but still, you know you did it. That's what the GP is talking about and it happens quite a bit in the humanities and economics. Its why private economists and public economists almost seem like different species.

The GP invented some sort of conspiracy theory that doesn't really seem like it's worth discussing, whether it happens a lot or not in reality.

Whether you believe what he said or not, my questions remain.

I stated facts, I invented nothing. I was asking a question that apparently rubbed you the wrong way, which is great! Makes you think!

I (and I believe the person I responded to) were talking about the comment above yours, which was a statement that Hopkins basically sells control of its research outcomes to donors.

Your question didn't bother me in the least, but I don't see why people are so surprised that a school or any other organization would accept millions and millions of cash to upgrade their surroundings.

That's fair. I'm not surprised per se, I think the point is about the strings attached to accepting that money. At least that's how I've been reading this thread.

That is their point, and mine is that it's baseless speculation that is almost certainly inaccurate, probably originating from a similarly uninformed and angry internal source to the one that produced the article in question.

I'm not saying it can't happen, or even that it's never happened, but I see no evidence from personal experience or news in academia that would indicate it's anything other than extraordinarily rare at most, and it certainly shouldn't be assumed to be the case for all donations unless proven otherwise.

The thing I described happened about 6 months ago.

Can you provide a link, rather than extremely vague accusations?

They are interested in doing some of these things precisely because they are being paid to.

They're interested in a new student union because they're being paid to? What does that mean?

They get the money for facilities etc off someone, and then do their bidding.

People, including university administrators, are generally interested in upgrading their surroundings whether or not they have the means to do so.

When the means are dropped in their lap, people act on those interests.

Yeah, a shiny object gets dangled in front of them. The Drew Pavlou case in Australia is very telling. The University of Queensland was pretty much in the pocket of the CCP, including having the local consul on its board. When Pavlou protested on Chinese human rights issues, he ended up suspended for two years. The UoQ obviously relishes Chinese students and investment, but wouldn't allow criticism of the regime.

I am all for criticizing the Chinese government, but that is not a remotely accurate description of what happened with Pavlou, nor particularly relevant to this article unless you have substantiated claims of that type of behavior at Hopkins (or even elsewhere in the US).