David won a small victory in court, but the jury’s $6 million award is nowhere near enough to compensate for losing his job, his life’s work, and the other damage done to him and his family. David faced a weaponized metoo situation involving an ex-girlfriend. He endured public ridicule, colleagues abandoning him, student protests, online bullying, and repeated pile-ons. STAT, Science, and many other outlets published hit pieces, including coverage that portrayed him as some loser who kept losing in court. MIT’s senior administrators recommended firing him. The board at the Whitehead, the MIT-affiliated institute where he ran his lab, backed his removal. These people dismantled a scientist’s career, yet there is little discussion within academia of accountability for their actions. Ruth Lehmann, Whitehead’s director, remains in her position, with a salary exceeding $1 million. She was appointed to another five-year term. I also remember news coverage of her publicly responding in a demeaning way to David’s claim that he had been discriminated against as a white man. MIT invokes evidence, merit, and accountability while its administrators escape the standards they say they want to impose on everyone else. Lehmann, the administrators involved, and the colleagues who contributed to and later celebrated his departure should be held accountable. Instead, I expect the same people will keep collecting appointments and honors while MIT congratulates itself on its values. STAT, Science, and other outlets will keep treating them as authorities without examining their conduct with the aggression they directed at David. Those outlets should answer for their own role in the pile-on too.