Manx

Yes, it is an accurate statement. The statement is that if Mitchell had received as much national media attention as Churchill, the Boulder press would have given it as much attention as it has Churchill.
I am well aware that there are events that take place in Boulder that are reported in the local news and not reported nationally. That does not make my statement inaccurate. Churchill did not deserve national or local coverage, Mitchell does not deserve national or local coverage. Churchill received national coverage because his essay was quickly misquoted into a very shocking sound bite. As a result, he received local coverage of epic proportions. Mitchell has no sound bite, he has no national coverage, he has no local Boulder media coverage. Though you might hear something from Wayne @ The Boulder Weekly ... but he'll jump on anything, so who knows.
Whether they are true or not has no bearing on whether this is a witch hunt. The other issues only became important when it was determined that CU public relations would be "better" if Churchill could be fired. An 8 year old plagarism accusation from someone in Denmark? Suddenly his heritage is in question? Please. There is no question that CU prefers to get rid of Churchill - if this were not the case, they would not have been looking to buy out his contract. And that's the issue - CU absolutely should not be trying to get rid of Churchill, they should be supporting him as much as possible. Any possible questions on his history should be very specifically placed on a back burner by CU until they have successfully, and rightly, defended him as he is being attacked for his essay. CU should have released a statement to that effect long ago. But they didn't, because they're sell outs. Reprehensible. I too would discourage my children from going to CU - specifically because the administration has such disdain for academe.