Students Turn Against Free Press

johnny karate said:
We have conflicting statements, one by a person involved in making the decision and one by a person who was not, with no objective evidence that supports his claims.

I give more weight to the former.
Click to expand...

Neither of them have any sort of objective evidence, and you don't know how much the dean knows.
 
johnny karate said:
Yes, it might have involved coercion.

However, absent any actual evidence of that coercion, I don't find it unreasonable to take the editor at his word when he says it was a choice.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure the tsunami of hate and intimidation had nothing to do with it.
 
Belz... said:
Neither of them have any sort of objective evidence, and you don't know how much the dean knows.
Click to expand...

You're right, I don't.

But I tend to believe what someone tells me directly about why they did something over what a second party tells me about it.

Furthermore, Whitaker's statement comes across to me as overly-dramatic and emotional, and doesn't really address the points raised in the editor's statement about why the student protesters might not feel comfortable having their identities published.

Put it to you this way, I feel the same way about the veracity of the claims Whitaker makes that every conservative on this forum would feel about a similarly dramatic and emotional statement made by one of the student protesters about their experience.
 
trustbutverify said:
Yes, I'm sure the tsunami of hate and intimidation had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

You're claiming that the student journalists were the victims of crimes on a scale comparable to a natural disaster.

Would you care to dial back the hyperbole or are you comfortable with this claim as it stands?
 
johnny karate said:
We have conflicting statements, one by a person involved in making the decision and one by a person who was not, with no objective evidence that supports his claims.

I give more weight to the former.
Click to expand...
johnny karate said:
You're right, I don't.

But I tend to believe what someone tells me directly about why they did something over what a second party tells me about it.

Furthermore, Whitaker's statement comes across to me as overly-dramatic and emotional, and doesn't really address the points raised in the editor's statement about why the student protesters might not feel comfortable having their identities published.

Put it to you this way, I feel the same way about the veracity of the claims Whitaker makes that every conservative on this forum would feel about a similarly dramatic and emotional statement made by one of the student protesters about their experience.
Click to expand...


Upon a closer read of his statement, Whitaker is also claiming a crime or crimes took place:
So to our student activists, I say let’s have a dialogue about what journalism is and what you might expect when you hold a protest in a public setting. Feel free to critique the coverage. That’s what The Daily’s opinion pages are for. Better yet, join the staff. The Daily is not and should not be the lone provenance of Medill students. I assure you, your input would be welcomed. But waging war on our students on social media - threatening them both physically and emotionally - is beyond the pale. Our community deserves a more civil level of discourse.
Click to expand...


That's a Class 3 felony in Illinois that can get you 10 years in prison.

It's been over a week and I can find no evidence that any criminal charges have been filed.

I feel comfortable in disregarding Whitaker's claims until such evidence presents itself.
 
Last edited:
Some commentary from the Chicago Sun-Times


First, from a former NorthWestern Student (Class of '82)


At first I blamed The Daily staffers; now I feel sorry for them. They didn’t join the paper to face what Whitaker called a “brutal onslaught of venom and hostility,” nor to be forced to kneel and recant in one of the most jarring blots on American journalism since last night’s Fox News. Here’s an irony. The protesters whose names The Daily dutifully erased are spared the buzzsaw of social media. While The Daily staffers who signed the confession are now open to ridicule...
Click to expand...


https://chicago.suntimes.com/column...f-sessions-campus-protest-steinberg-nu-medill


Second from the editorial staff


American journalism is under fire from the right.

We have a president who has convinced a third of the nation that the media regularly reports “fake news.” This, of course, would be any news the president does not like.

Journalism is under fire from above, from corporate owners who would prefer that reporters make no waves.

And so you find the entire staff of Deadspin, the online sports website, quitting this month because the new owners sent down a memo ordering them to “stick to sports.” As if sports journalism ends at the edge of a playing field and should not include coverage of domestic violence by ballplayers, the NBA’s kowtowing to China and professional athletes stiffing White House invitations.
Editorials

American journalism is under fire from the left, as well, most obviously among the young and “woke.”

They would suppress full and honest reporting out of an overabundance of concern for hurt feelings, an unwillingness to accept that free speech cuts both ways and a refusal to accept how real journalism must work.
Click to expand...


https://chicago.suntimes.com/2019/1...rnalism-harvard-crimson-deadspin-troy-closson
 
yelling FIRE on a crowded campus

Dean Whitaker wrote, "I understand why The Daily editors felt the need to issue their mea culpa. They were beat into submission by the vitriol and relentless public shaming they have been subjected to since the Sessions stories appeared. I think it is a testament to their sensitivity and sense of community responsibility that they convinced themselves that an apology would effect a measure of community healing."

Having heard Greg Lukianoff from FIRE address this point, I do not believe that threats to free speech come solely from then right or the left. IMO both should be called out.
 
While legally in the US they did not have it, it would have been nice to have asked consent of any persons who were the subject of a photo for permission to publish. Here they would have had to ask for consent where this occurs.

Also I don't think there is any law in the US about privacy of information, so legally I don't think that going through the phone lists was wrong, though ethically, might have been on the gray side. Again here it'd run into privacy laws, if the lists were constructed for the purpose of staff and students being able to contact each other, then for a Newspaper, even if staffed by students, to use it for soliciting interviews, it would be likely be a breach of our privacy laws.
 
johnny karate said:
Yep:


Intimidation is a felony and a tsunami is a natural disaster.

So yes, you literally claimed that the student journalists were the victims of crimes on a scale comparable with a natural disaster.
Click to expand...

Sure. Because when someone says "the news hit me like a ton of bricks", they mean the news impacted their lives on the same scale as someone dropping one ton of bricks on them. And when someone says "it's hell outside", they actually mean the temperature is high enough to melt the flesh off of human bones. And when someone says "that guy was as big as a house", they actually mean he was as large as a 3BR, 1.5 bath single family home.

Right?
 
trustbutverify said:
Sure. Because when someone says "the news hit me like a ton of bricks", they mean the news impacted their lives on the same scale as someone dropping one ton of bricks on them. And when someone says "it's hell outside", they actually mean the temperature is high enough to melt the flesh off of human bones. And when someone says "that guy was as big as a house", they actually mean he was as large as a 3BR, 1.5 bath single family home.

Right?
Click to expand...

Which is why I asked you if you wanted to dial back the hyperbole or stick with the claim as it is.

Tsunamis aside, do you maintain that crimes were committed?
 
PhantomWolf said:
While legally in the US they did not have it, it would have been nice to have asked consent of any persons who were the subject of a photo for permission to publish.
Click to expand...

That isn’t possible for photographs of crowds. Nor is it even desirable in all case where it is possible.
 
trustbutverify said:
Sure. Because when someone says "the news hit me like a ton of bricks", they mean the news impacted their lives on the same scale as someone dropping one ton of bricks on them. And when someone says "it's hell outside", they actually mean the temperature is high enough to melt the flesh off of human bones. And when someone says "that guy was as big as a house", they actually mean he was as large as a 3BR, 1.5 bath single family home.

Right?
Click to expand...

Lol

Was thinking this in my head, but didn't have the creative skills to do a post as good as this.
 
johnny karate said:
Which is why I asked you if you wanted to dial back the hyperbole or stick with the claim as it is.

Tsunamis aside, do you maintain that crimes were committed?
Click to expand...

We don't particularly have proof either way except for the words from the Dean.

I personally actually tend towards going with his words than the both the other sides as they have both behaved stupidly and he is the more impartial source about the whole event.

As the newspaper has proven to be weak and the others snowflakes

Probably equipped with more info of the thing
 
student journalists and student protesters

"People, students or not, need to understand that while they are free to protest, they are also protesting in public spaces and forfeit their right to privacy," William Celis, an associate professor of journalism at the University of Southern California, told Newsweek.

Newsweek went on to note that, "That's not to say student journalists should consider their peers to be a no-holds-barred breeding ground for stories. Unlike politicians, who know the implications of speaking to the media, ordinary people may not have the foresight about the consequences of going public.

Coleman and Lorente encouraged students to approach coverage of people who may not be media savvy with additional care and respect. Since journalists haven't always "been there" for marginalized communities, Lorente said, it's understandable they'd be suspicious of the media. In some cases, such as publicly naming an undocumented person, journalists should explain what could happen if a person enters the spotlight, Coleman advised."
 
cullennz said:
We don't particularly have proof either way except for the words from the Dean.
Click to expand...

Do you accept Whitaker’s claim that crimes were committed?

I personally actually tend towards going with his words than the both the other sides as they have both behaved stupidly and he is the more impartial source about the whole event.
Click to expand...

Whitaker’s statement was an emotionally-charged screed with a very clear point of view and I’m not sure where anyone would get the idea that he‘s impartial.

As the newspaper has proven to be weak and the others snowflakes

Probably equipped with more info of the thing
Click to expand...

Cool. Do you accept his claim that crimes were committed?
 
johnny karate said:
You're right, I don't.

But I tend to believe what someone tells me directly about why they did something over what a second party tells me about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah but presumably you've interacted with actual humans before and know that they're not entirely trustworthy.

Furthermore, Whitaker's statement comes across to me as overly-dramatic and emotional, and doesn't really address the points raised in the editor's statement about why the student protesters might not feel comfortable having their identities published.
Click to expand...

Emotional? What's that even mean? The very fact that they retracted is because of emotional reasons, and due to an emotional reaction, and now 'emotional' from a third person means his account is suspect?
 
johnny karate said:
Which is why I asked you if you wanted to dial back the hyperbole or stick with the claim as it is.

Tsunamis aside, do you maintain that crimes were committed?
Click to expand...

But what you said was ********. When people say "a tsunami of hate" they do not mean that it was literally as bad as a real tsunami. Perhaps English is not your first language, in which case I apologise, but nobody with a firm grasp of idiomatic English would read "as bad as as a real tsunami" into what trustbutverify wrote.

I think your objection to the point is disingenuous (unless, see previous point that maybe English is not your first language). Dispute that there was a lot of hate and intimidation directed at the editors of the paper if you like - we only have the word of the Dean of Journalism for it at this point - but don't insult our intelligence with spurious crap about metaphors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom