The highly specific cases are glaring examples that the unbiased meritocracy they pretend to be is, possibly, not so.

And the "large numbers of students" covers up the possible cronyism and/or corruption of the institution.

I provide an example of a totally unqualified individual being allowed into a prestigious institution solely on the basis of his marriage family. Your response is that they mostly do a good job for most people?

I've suggested that the research they do is not obviously beneficial to anyone except perhaps the person doing the research, possibly simply to advance their own careers (in or out of academia). Others have suggested the same.

You haven't disagreed.