The Kent Stater broke news Tuesday that the FBI is investigating Kent State associate professor of history Julio Pino for potential links to the radical terrorist group ISIS. It’s since made national headlines and led to an array of reactions across the country.
It is not yet known whether Pino is guilty or innocent, but the professor has already been indicted in the eyes of many. Some are terrified, while others are wondering why Pino is still employed, but it is too soon to make a judgment on the investigation, both from the FBI and public perspective.
For Kent State, this is yet another negative mark on its reputation: the shootings on May 4, 1970, a professor's arrest for having sexual relations with a 15-year-old boy and now Pino's alleged involvement with ISIS.
The problem is these events are not items the current administration can actively do much about or prevent. These are the actions of the few that affect the reputation of the many. But should they?
Why must this type of incident once again define Kent State's overall reputation? How can one convict a school — or even one man — based off the report it's possible a professor has connections with a radical organization when there is not yet proof?
When people across the country consume news this week, they will see Kent State once again cast in a negative light, but it does not reflect the university as a whole or even necessarily accuracy. Until the FBI releases the findings of its investigation, there is no point to unfounded speculation about a university that has had more than its fair share of negative attention.