Tattletale Journalism

One thing I have not been clear about. What did Don McNeil actually do?

I have read two wildly different accounts about that student trip.

Originally, the Times statement about it said he repeated "a racist slur in the context of a conversation about racist language." If that was it, yeah, this was a mob gone bully -- and him being forced out makes no sense. The idea of trying to scrub the language of words people find offensive, ignores all context. There is a difference between a racist person using a racial slur. ... and someone who doesn't have that kind of intent acknowledging that there are hateful people who use the word, and having a discussion about it. Pretending the word doesn't exist in that context is childish to me. And the fact that some people lose their minds and make no distinction is nuts. The word exists and it gets used by hateful people. The best way to address the hateful sentiments (not just a word) should be openness about it, not an Orwellian approach that devolves into mob justice. Intent and context should matter.

All of that said, though, the complaints of the students and parents on that trip went way beyond that. They were saying that he was saying racist and sexist things throughout the trip, saying disparaging things about black teenagers and that he said that "white supremacy doesn't exist." If that is the case, he's the racist.

Which was it? Because the latter is pretty serious.

 

I still found it difficult to tell from reading that. I think the disconnect is in assumptions those kids might make (because of how they have been raised) when they are "triggered" by a word or a topic. ... and what McNeil may (or may not) have actually said (and meant). My sense is that maybe he's kind of a prick, a difficult guy, so it's not like there was a groundswell of support for him when the mob came for him.

 

My understanding was that he wasn't terminated, he resigned. I wonder if he just decided it wasn't worth trying to work in an environment in which there were going to be so many people having a canary over his presence.

I also agree with your assessment in your last post. We don't know for sure what happened on that trip. There is enough ambiguity where he could be a racist prick. ... or he could be a 67-year-old guy who is out of touch, as @daemon said (and that would be my guess, too). I know if I can't tell what happened on that trip, the 150 employees who are "outraged and in pain" can't know either.