Dear Snowflake - get some steel-toed boots

[vaskidmark]

http://roth.blogs.wesleyan.edu/2015/09/19/black-lives-matter-and-so-does-free-speech/

....   Many students took strong exception to the article; it was meant to be a provocative piece. Some students not only have expressed their disagreement with the op-ed but have demanded apologies, a retraction and have even harassed the author and the newspaper’s editors. Some are claiming that the op-ed was less speech than action: it caused harm and made people of color feel unsafe.

Debates can raise intense emotions, but that doesn’t mean that we should demand ideological conformity because people are made uncomfortable.  ....

Seems, per the comments, that there are more educated folks than iggerunt idjits at Wesleyan.  Whodathunkit?

Of course, it's a small sample and we have no reporting on the arson/looting committed in the name of silencing those that will not kowtow to BLM*.

stay safe.

* - I still have to stop and realize that it refers to something other than the Bureau of Land Management. 

[griz]

If I'm reading this correctly it is a comment/defense of an op-ed piece.  If there is a link to that piece I am missing it.  I would like to read it to see if it was action or speech.

[wmenorr67]

I can't believe this is coming from a college/university president.  It actually makes sense and not all left wingy.  Sure this isn't a piece from the Duffle Blog?

[wmenorr67]

If I'm reading this correctly it is a comment/defense of an op-ed piece.  If there is a link to that piece I am missing it.  I would like to read it to see if it was action or speech.

http://wesleyanargus.com/2015/09/18/after-charleston-brief-post-event/

[vaskidmark]

If I'm reading this correctly it is a comment/defense of an op-ed piece.  If there is a link to that piece I am missing it.  I would like to read it to see if it was action or speech.

Pretty sure this is it.

http://wesleyanargus.com/2015/09/18/after-charleston-brief-post-event/

You now owe me $23,817,965.13 for doing a Google search for you.

stay safe.

Damn scab beat me to it.  Cheated out of another fee.

[wmenorr67]

Pretty sure this is it.

http://wesleyanargus.com/2015/09/18/after-charleston-brief-post-event/

You now owe me $23,817,965.13 for doing a Google search for you.

stay safe.

Damn scab beat me to it.  Cheated out of another fee.

 

[griz]

Just read the linked article, but it seems to be a report on what the panel said, not, as Roth said, "an op-ed that questioned whether “the [BLM] movement itself [is] actually achieving anything positive".  On this computer I am blocked from looking for articles, so I'll try again later.  Accordingly, your search fee payment is withheld until I verify the accuracy of your claims.  If it turns out that is the correct op-ed piece, a very official looking rubber check in the amount of  $23,817,965.13 (minus the 10 percent APS discount) will be issued to each of you.  Thanks from Griz's research department

[Scout26]

Make sure it's drawn on the account of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma from the East Bank of the Mississippi.

 

[dogmush]

The O.G. oped:

Why Black Lives Matter Isn’t What You Think*

If Bryan is a "Person of Color", Uncle Tom name calling in 5.....4.....3.....


*Check or AAC gift certificate is acceptable.



ETA: Bracket for url tag - adively

[wmenorr67]

The O.G. oped:

Why Black Lives Matter Isn’t What You Think*

If Bryan is a "Person of Color", Uncle Tom name calling in 5.....4.....3.....


*Check or AAC gift certificate is acceptable.



ETA: Bracket for url tag - adively

Nope, white as new fallen snow.

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/24314/

[dogmush]

Someone should send that guy Vox Day's PDF on being attacked  by SJW's.

[griz]

Finally read the "controversial" article and I am astounded.  Somebody ask simple, straight forward questions and it not only requires an apology (in the eyes of the snowflakes) but borders on action instead of speech?  Imagine what would happen if he said they were WRONG instead of just questioning their effectiveness.  You know, at some point we will have to admit we are doing our college students a real disservice by leading them to believe that anybody who disagrees with their opinion is guilty of hate speech if not slander.

BTW, Dogmush is of course the one entitled to the fee.  Can I round it to 20 million?  Heck, the check will be just as valuable if I round it up to 25 mil, it's in the mail.

[Devonai]

I lived across the street from campus in '86-'87. There are underground passages between the main buildings which used to be used by students during inclement weather. There's a great hill for sledding on campus too. There's also a nice graveyard next to the campus.

I used to walk around their tennis courts looking for lost tennis balls, or visit the library to play Escape from Rungistan on their Apple IIe. Fun stuff.

[wmenorr67]

More on this here this morning.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/09/25/college-student-op-ed-criticizing-black-lives-matter-movement-stirs-controversy/?intcmp=hpbt3

After the backlash, however, editors-in-chief Rebecca Brill and Tess Morgan issued a lengthy statement apologizing "for the distress the piece caused the student body."

"The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts," the two wrote. "As Wesleyan’s student newspaper, it is our responsibility to provide our readership with accurate information. We vow to raise our standards of journalism and to fact-check questionable information cited in articles, including those in the Opinion section, prior to publication."

But yet they don't mention what those are.

That being said, we acknowledge that the way in which the op-ed was published gave the writer’s words validity. First and foremost, we apologize for our carelessness in fact-checking. The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts. As Wesleyan’s student newspaper, it is our responsibility to provide our readership with accurate information. We vow to raise our standards of journalism and to fact-check questionable information cited in articles, including those in the Opinion section, prior to publication.

Additionally, the piece was published without a counter-argument in favor of the Black Lives Matter movement alongside it, and this lack of balance gave too much weight to the views expressed in the op-ed. We should have addressed the unevenness of the Opinion section in Tuesday’s issue prior to publication. In the future, we will carefully consider the context in which articles are published and work to represent a wider variety of views, even if this entails holding off on publishing a particular op-ed until we have appropriate material to run with it.

From this: http://wesleyanargus.com/2015/09/17/staff-editorial/

[dogmush]

The comments section of the staff editorial is surprisingly refreshing.

Folks on both sides of the BLM issue are telling the staff to nut up and stick to their guns.  Newspapers are supposed to be controversial. 

A good one:

As a former editor on the Argus, I am troubled by this apology. You work on a newspaper. It's a dinky, barely readable newspaper, but it's still a newspaper. Reporters and editors have fought for the freedom to say what they want in many countries, including ours. You don't need to apologize if people disagree with an op-ed that you print. Apologies like this reflect a totalitarian culture that you must fight. I say this as a left-winger who strongly supports Black Lives Matter. You can print WesSpeaks criticizing the first Op-Ed, you can correct facts that are wrong, but you should never apologize for offending people. It's your job to provoke thought and it is your job to uphold the freedom to print any opinion you wish to print. Rebecca Schiff, class of '01

[griz]

Sorry it takes me so long to read the links, but I am blocked from the paper during the day.

The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts," the two wrote. "As Wesleyan’s student newspaper, it is our responsibility to provide our readership with accurate information.

I don't claim to be a journalist, but I thought the correct response to inaccurate stats and facts was to publish a correction, not an apology.  Despite what the front page apology says, something tells me that some feelings are more equal than others.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I can't believe this is coming from a college/university president.  It actually makes sense and not all left wingy.  Sure this isn't a piece from the Duffle Blog?

The edumicated liberals in the ivory towers of thought are actually some of the hardest hit by the SJW BS. They are starting to realize this and they are not liking it at all.

My mother is one of those super liberal educated folks. She is absolutely rabid when it comes to crap like "safe space" and "trigger warnings".

To give such people their due, they are usually the first to get snotty about anything resembling censorship (when they recognize it as being censorship, which sometimes they don't)

[zxcvbob]

Sorry it takes me so long to read the links, but I am blocked from the paper during the day.

I don't claim to be a journalist, but I thought the correct response to inaccurate stats and facts was to publish a correction, not an apology.  Despite what the front page apology says, something tells me that some feelings are more equal than others.

I'm not a journalist either, but you are correct.  The newspaper libeled the author and he should sue them for it, IMHO.  They've already demonstrated their willingness to cave.