Is falsifying information the cardinal sin of academia?

IPBiz notes the irony in text from the Coloradoan:

Churchill was charged with multiple counts of falsifying and fabricating information, improper research and plagiarism, the cardinal sin of academia. All students are well aware of the seriousness of plagiarism. Academic integrity and honesty is just as much of a part of academic freedom as free speech. Any violation or dishonest deed can lead to a student's expulsion from school. Why should professors feel as if they are exempt? As a tenured faculty member, Churchill was well aware of the rules set forth by the regents of the university regarding his responsibility to uphold academic integrity. Discrediting and misrepresenting someone else's work does not constitute support for these standards.

Recall an earlier IPBiz post: The commission consists of various well-reputed men and women of letters, including Doris Kearns Goodwin -- the Pulitzer Prize-winning author hired as the Commission's historical advisor, who publicly apologized in 2002 for plagiarizing some of her colleague's work. Perhaps this reveals the quickness with which some at the University discard standards of honor when it becomes convenient to do so.

Also:

http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2006/08/harvard-business-review-article.html
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2005/09/laurence-tribe-issue-surfaces-at.html