Former Harvard Business School faculty member Ben Edelman released video evidence contesting the Faculty Review Board’s use of negative quotes in his denied tenure case, escalating a private academic personnel dispute into public scrutiny. Edelman argues the report relied on cherry‑picked, paraphrased and decontextualized comments to justify the school’s decision; the lawsuit has exposed internal evaluations and depositions of prominent administrators. The civil suit names senior HBS administrators and has made confidential Faculty Review Board reports public for the first time, prompting debate about tenure confidentiality, faculty governance and transparency in academic personnel decisions. Legal filings and released materials show tensions between administrative secrecy and faculty due process. Observers say the case could influence how elite institutions document tenure reviews, balance confidentiality with accountability, and structure appeals—particularly when litigants seek court oversight of academic decisions.