Free Speech

1619 Project Author Nikole Hannah-Jones Denied Tenure at UNC-Chapel Hill

The surprising move raises concerns about academic freedom.

|

Nikole Hannah-Jones is a New York Times reporter and lead author of the 1619 Project, an award-winning investigative effort that came under serious criticism. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill recently selected her to be Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism as well.

But this appointment has come with controversy. It was expected that Hannah-Jones would be granted a tenure-track position; instead, she received a non-tenured five-year appointment, with an option for tenure once it expires. According to the Times, UNC-Chapel Hill's board of trustees has some say over this outcome, and may have been motivated to deny Hannah-Jones tenure due to conservatives' objections to her work. (The board of trustees is indirectly influenced by the state's Republican-controlled legislature.)

Hannah-Jones has become something of a lightning rod: While the 1619 Project attracted considerable praise—even winning a Pulitzer Prize—many historians (and not just those on the political right) have objected to both the project's framing and certain claims that it makes. Hannah-Jones has not always engaged these critics in good faith.

That said, it's clear the faculty within the journalism department wished for this to be a tenured position, and that it's rare for the trustees to overrule the faculty's wishes in matters such as this. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism, and while all the details are not known, it's hard to escape the conclusion that she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint.

"If it is accurate that this refusal was the result of viewpoint discrimination against Hannah-Jones, particularly based on political opposition to her appointment, this decision has disturbing implications for academic freedom, which is vital in allowing faculty members to voice divergent views and in avoiding casting what the Supreme Court called a 'pall of orthodoxy' over the classroom," wrote the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Adam Steinbaugh. "When decisions on academic tenure incorporate a form of political litmus test, this freedom is gravely compromised."

NEXT: Teen Arrested Under Connecticut’s Unconstitutional Hate Speech Law for Racist Social Media Post

Free Speech Media Criticism College Campus Free Speech

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

266 responses to “1619 Project Author Nikole Hannah-Jones Denied Tenure at UNC-Chapel Hill

  1. Maybe because her work was crap?

    1. Judging the quality of a person’s work is RACIST, you racist!

      1. But this appointment has come with controversy. It was expected that Hannah-Jones would be granted a tenure-track position; instead, she received a non-tenured five-year appointment, with an option for tenure once it expires.

        So, contrary to Robby’s headline, she wasn’t even really denied tenure. This headline and article are both absolute crap!

        1. My real time work with face book I am making over $2000 a month operating low maint­enance. I continued h­earing distinctive people divulge to me how an lousy lot cash they can make on line so I selected to research it.asd All topics considered, it become all legitimate and has without a doubt changed my life.

          For more statistics visit below site here… Home Profit System

          1. [ JOIN PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…..VISIT HERE

    2. Teaching Marxism is acceptable. Teaching it as TRVTH is not.

      And they get upset if you call it a religion.

    3. No advanced degree . No experience teaching. Can’t find a Historian of that period who backs her claims. Yup sounds like someone to fast track for tenure.

    4. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months.I am very happy rtrtrtrtthat i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life.Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period.Just visit this

      website . ☛☛☛☛☛☛☛☛ Visit Here

    5. Change it to the Racist Chair in Lies and Propaganda and she’s eminently qualified.

  2. Maybe they didn’t want another mendacious, woke victim hung around their neck forever? Is that a possibility? Fuck her. She’s not “entitled” to tenure just because she’s supposedly a “journalist”.

    1. No, they did. Apparently she’s still going to get paid.

    2. The only people who objected to her tenure were the board of overseers, predominantly Republican… for now.

      The faculty and the administration wanted her, and they have appointed her to a five year position, which they could do without board approval.

      1. So, they have a Five Year Plan?

      2. So, the board of overseers are rational, reasonable folks. The faculty and administration, not so much. 1619 is such shoddy scholarship, the overseer’s were way too lenient.

        1. Sadly, the faculty and administration will win this battle in the long term. They’ll find a way of giving her tenure, and if not her, then some other neo-Marxist and racist.

      3. No, a large portion of the faculty disapproved of her nomination in the first place. This was an appointment that the woke administration of UNC Chapel Hill tried to jam down the throats of the history department. Her “book” is a boatload of leftist claptrap that has been denounced by over 500 college history teachers and true historians of note. All this 1619 crap was designed to do was give the leftist NEA and AFT unions a framework to create more BS to use to indoctrinate high school history students with. Jones herself admits it isn’t history, just her opinion of it. If she wanted to look someplace to find a true history of slavery, perhaps she should have looked at the blacks in sub-Saharan Africa who sold millions of their “brothers” into bondage to the Muslims where they were worked to death in the Saharan salt mines starting around 1000 AD. But that wouldn’t sell books or win her a Pulitzer, or get her a gig spreading her BS to college kids despite her lack of a degree or any record as a teacher, like a pack of lies about “evil whitey” would. This was woke virtue signaling by UNC, and for once these leftist assholes got caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar.

    3. I’d say that for a state school, there is a legitimate place for some politics to be involved in determining what the ideological makeup of the faculty is.

  3. #cancelthiscunt

    1. And the best hash tag of the year award goes to…

      1. But who does the hashtag go to?

    2. Yes. A dose of her own medicine.

  4. #cancelthisracist

    1. And best supporting hash tag is…

  5. Still don’t believe SYSTEMIC RACISM and WHITE SUPREMACY are the dominant forces in the US — even with Drumpf out of office? The unimaginable oppression experienced by NHJ proves it.

    She won’t give up though. She’ll keep speaking truth to power even when doing so causes her tremendous personal suffering. One day I hope to be half as courageous as she is.

    #LibertariansForNHJ

    1. “Truth to power” is an imaginary phrase used by failures who have no grasp of the truth, but rely on systemic racism to claim they’re equal to their superiors based on their skin color.

      Lieberals hate it when I speak truth to power.

      As far as courage, of course you have none. Liberals never do. They’re all looking for a sugar daddy cock to suck, like Marx with his Engels.

      1. OBL remains a reliable source of spoofery and satire here on the Reason boards. FYI, UranAzol.

    2. Claims of “white supremacy” reveal a belief that Europeans are genetically superior.

      And that the claimant is a racist.

    3. I believe that racism is systemic in the university systems. Just ask Jews and also White males.

      1. And Asian students applying to said universities.

    4. “one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery”

      Intro to the 1619 project and core to its intent. Not in the least bit truth.

      Cynicism is a shitty way to go through life.

      1. There were no assault style fire extinguishers at the Boston tea party so it couldn’t have been an insurrection.

        1. You can find fine girls ready for casual chat contacts in UK on our web platform Women4men

    5. If she’s going to speak “truth to power”, doesn’t she have to be speaking truth first and foremost?

      In the current environment of packaging ideology as news and dressing up opinions as facts, maybe she is eminently qualified to teach “journalism”, but only if the plan is to steer into that particular skid.

  6. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism,

    This is not remotely true. She got caught lying in an series of articles.

    Your better than this robby

    1. When I read that I honestly blinked. I thought Robby had made progress here.

      Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism

      She’s never gonna fuck you Robby.

      1. He’ll settle for a sandwich, thank you.

    2. No, he’s really not

    3. How absolutely, unrelentingly awful must the quality of her research and work have been, that UNC would find its balls and deny tenure to a (relatively) famous black woman annointed by the NYT?

    4. “Your better than this robby”

      Gonna need some evidence.

      1. The fact that he researches his articles and if a video is involve he watches the whole video

        1. Ie covington catholic, and calling out ENB on her retarded blind obedience to the progressive narrarative on the Atlanta massage parlor shooting

          1. The reverend of the Cucks speaks. The men ignore.

            1. No, I appreciate that he tried to offer some specifics.

              Unfortunately it’s pretty weak sauce, and those are probably Robby’s greatest hits.

              To recap:
              1. He does the bare essentials. How well? Um… I suppose this make shim the toughest kid in the Chess Club but, so what?
              2. He wasn’t dead wrong on the Covington kids. But I still wouldn’t want him in my fighting position.
              3. Calling out ENB once is a mark of distinction now???? Any day ending in Y should be more like it. It also ignores all the twitter shit and inside baseball that he blind eyes.

          2. Wasn’t he a lone voice on the Duke Lacrosse Case, too?

            1. Wasn’t he about 12 then?

      2. He is at least the best Reason has at the moment for doing actual journalism. I think he’s doing a lot of good stuff.

        1. Yep, toughest kid in the Chess Club.

          The thing is, he’s just barely over that ridiculously low bar. He should be running rings around the narrative scribes here. But we know he is not, and we can pretty obviously guess why he’s not.

        2. He is at least the best Reason has at the moment for doing actual journalism.

          Which is a pretty damned sad statement.

    5. Is that like being eminently qualified to teach a gender studies class? Because if so, then yes, she probably is.

    6. Didn’t he write an article laying out how wrong she, and her methodology/research, were?

      1. Which would only serve as an indictment of what he wrote in this article.

        Because it’s no longer a matter of what he should have known, but clear indication that he did know all along.

        1. Maybe OBL is his account and the article is a troll job.

          1. Newsletter
            Subscribed

    7. Perhaps letting universities have sole choice of who works there has been a laughingly bad idea that should have been curtailed decades ago…

    8. It’s possible for somebody to be qualified to do something, but still be a bad pick for it, because you know that they’ll insist on doing it wrong.

      Embezzlers are usually qualified to be accountants.

      That nurse who was poisoning patients years ago was fully qualified to be a nurse.

      Bellesiles knew how to be a competent historian.

      And Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified for the job, in a technical sense. It’s just that she’d be determined to do it wrong anyway.

    9. This isn’t the first time Robby’s left wing cultism bled through.
      https://reason.com/2019/09/06/alabama-dean-jamie-riley-resign-breitbart/#comment-7922093

  7. Robby, you missed this one.

    As someone who teaches in higher education, she failed the most basic tests in the work she produced. It was poor quality, poorly researched, and assailed by academics about it’s academics in a non-partisan way. She may have work experience dealing with race in journalism, but she does not have the academic chops to teach it. She also doesn’t have the academic credibility to earn tenure.

    Popular people in popular culture don’t deserve a free ride to tenure. Tenure is earned, not gifted.

    1. Robby’s politics are dictated by the women he wants to bed. Because Robby lives in DC, his prospects overwhelmingly belong to the affluent white female liberal (or AWFL) demographic (generally cheugy 6/10 women who went to prep school, have hyphenated last names, are closet alcoholics, and use like yasss and doggo). AWFLs worship this woman, so if Robby wants to get laid, he has to simp and defend Nikole. Beta. Male.

      1. When it comes to robbie you are barking up the wrong tree for “wemon he wants tk bed

        1. I get metrosexual vibes from him with a touch of male feminist “ally”

          1. Robby’s the kind of guy who pretends to be gay, so the fat girls invite him to their sleepover.

            1. Now that just enough to make me want to ralph.

            2. Robby is the jerry falwell jr type, sitting in the corner like a good lil simp

      2. “…affluent white female liberal (or AWFL)”

        And the award for best acronym of the year goes to…

        Man, this thread is a real honey pot!

        1. It’s been around for a while, but it’s spot on.

        2. Ahem……. second best.

      3. “Cheugy”? TIL…https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheugy

        I’ve no idea how you get from ‘recently out of style and a bit cringeworthy’ to cheugy, but it’s certainly shorter to write.

      4. I thought he was married.

        1. how does the spouse identify?

        2. He is. Hot wife. Female, too.

          Still, he totally gives off a queer vibe. Maybe she likes that about him.

      5. AWFLs. Haha. Yup.

    2. “… she failed the most basic tests in the work she produced. It was poor quality, poorly researched, and assailed by academics about it’s academics in a non-partisan way.”

      You may be correct (from what I know of the project, I agree.)
      But, how can you support not giving grad students the chance to mock her, chastise her, and openly laugh at her interpretation of history?

      /sarc
      /or not

      1. “…how can you support not giving grad students the chance to mock her, chastise her, and openly laugh at her interpretation of history?”

        That’s what the gypsy lecturer caste is for, not the tenured gentry.

        1. As a grad student trying to earn a fellowship, I mocked a well-known, tenured (three books published) professor in composition as part of a one-hour presentation. I basically accused him of using cultural Darwinism in his approach to evaluating students. He was the most “ivory-towered” prof I ever met. And his politics were so far left he thought Cuba had a freer press than do we.

          But, he was a very fair person, took my criticism well, and gave me an A, and I landed the fellowship. And yes, the seminar was good — he forced me to reevaluate my approaches, which is always a good thing.

          Did I mention that grad school was the easiest part of my entire educational experience? And the most fun, too.

          1. I can’t say the same. Organic chemistry is an a$$kicker. I got my PhD, but I worked damned hard for it.

            My MS in Education on the other hand…

            1. My step-sister was a bio-chemist working for a lab in CA (she retired a few years ago), but I definitely remember her talking about organic chemistry an “ass-kicker.”

              Also, the real sciences are much tougher on new ideas than English and Composition (or Education, or History etc, etc.) which, well, pretty much rely on new ideas (usually re-packaged old ideas), to justify their existence.

              Linguistics can be pretty tough, however.

          2. It’s possible for somebody to hold extreme, even abhorrent views, and yet have enough intellectual integrity to actually welcome a good attack on them. Good professors can appreciate having a student spar with them that way.

            I had a philosophy and ethics prof in college who was very happy that I chose to offer a full throated defense of ethical egoism in his class. And rip other ethical theories to shreds in the process. He certainly wasn’t an ethical egoist himself. He just liked the fact that I was making the other students have to address strong arguments for a position they didn’t share. (I didn’t really, either, but found it amusing.)

    3. Did she publish any academic papers in peer-reviewed journals? That’s the real requirement for tenure – publish (in peer-reviewed journals) or perish.

  8. That said, it’s clear the faculty within the journalism department wished for this to be a tenured position, and that it’s rare for the trustees to overrule the faculty’s wishes in matters such as this.

    Is academic freedom supposed to mean that the university will be ruled by a majority of the faculty? If it is, then it’s something very different from what most of the rest of us have been led to believe and probably not something the rest of us should attach much value to. If, on the other hand, it’s supposed to mean individual academics should be free to engage in good faith scholarship without any outside interference, then you may have a point. But, no more a point than any conservative scholar’s claim of a violation of academic freedom because progressive faculty won’t hire him. The idea that viewpoint discrimination by a professor’s colleagues is somehow more legitimate than that of the Board of Trustees, who ostensibly represent those paying for the whole affair, seems a dubious one.

    1. Yeah, this was along the lines of what I was thinking. There are probably dozens if not a hundred or more schools that would be delighted to support her. It doesn’t necessarily mean that UNC is going to be one of those. Presumably one does not apply to Evergreen if they want to teach a course on Misean Economics.

  9. Tenure is useless for promoting ideological diversity on campus. Wrongthink is weeded out well before tenure is offered and the concept of tenure isn’t worth defending.
    Was thinking this is a strange case to get upset about, but I guess “lefty denied tenure” is a man-bites-dog story.

  10. “The surprising move raises concerns about academic freedom.”

    Denying tenure to a woke professor is an act that lowers concerns about academic freedom. It’s good to know that denying tenure to a woke professor is still possible.

    1. Denying tenure to a professor who produced shoddy, agenda driven propaganda is an act that lowers concerns about academic freedom. It’s good to know that denying tenure to such a professor is still possible.

      FIFY

      1. I thought being woke was absolution for all the other sins, just as being un-woke is the unpardonable sin, no matter the quality of the professor’s work.

        1. Woke doesn’t bother me as much as the harm her poorly researched and developed curriculum will. To whit, I don’t care what Coke or MLB or whoever says or makes decisions based on woke. Not my clown, not my circus. What the intend to teach my sons in school does.

          1. The whole point of her “noble lies” are to create a more woke world of people who believe them.

            I don’t think you can separate the act from the intent, at least not this time. Her woke intentions are the source of the willful errors in her work.

          2. Exactly that Kristian. The problem isn’t her politics. The problem is she is a liar and a fraud. The things she writes and claims about American history have been shown time and again to be completely contrary to the evidence. She is a terrible historian and did not deserve tenure.

            This isn’t a case of someone like Eric Hobsbwam who despite holding absolutely monstrous politics was in fact a very significant and accomplished historian. This is the case of a bad historian justifiably being denied tenure. That anyone thinks her denial in any way implicates academic freedom is a product of the speaker’s sympathy towards her loathsome politics and nothing else.

            1. This is the case of a bad historian justifiably being denied tenure.

              She’s not a historian, she’s a journalist. If journalism means to you what it does to her, the NYT, and essentially all leftists in the US [The use of media to support left wing politics.] she’s not obviously a bad journalist from their perspective. The obviousness of her fantastic assertions hurts their credibility among some, but not to people who matter (as proven by their effort to appoint her). Most believe providing the framework enabling their propaganda mission to be more effective is a fantastic accomplishment. Only the rubes maintain the bourgeoisie belief facts and reality matter.

              The knock against HJ is that her journalism is corrupt. Of course that’s true for all left wing journalism, which means the overwhelming majority of journalism in the country.

              1. I had no idea she wasn’t an historian. My bad for assuming that there were any standards at all.

            2. “The problem isn’t her politics. The problem is she is a liar and a fraud.”

              I don’t understand how you’re distinguishing between them.

              Defrauding people so they’ll start believing different things is her politics.

              This is straight from Plato’s section of The Republic about noble lies.

              Socrates proposes and claims that if the people believed “this myth…[it] would have a good effect, making them more inclined to care for the state and one another.”[5]

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_lie#Plato's_Republic

              That’s what she’s doing. She thinks the world would be a better place if people believed certain things–regardless of whether they’re true.

              1. Her politics and her noble lies are one in the same thing.

    2. This move is surprising only in that the Trustees had the intestinal fortitude to deny immediate tenure in face of the progressive love fest for this propagandist.

      1. ^; but their timing was perfect; the academic year is essentially over, and football players on their knees or refusing to play can’t be a thing at least until September.

        It will all fall on BLM or antifa to organize a mostly peaceful protest, if they are still not too busy tearing up Portland or Minneapolis.

  11. The greatest outrage since Madame Lafarge was tenure as Professor of Knitting at Sciences Po.

    1. I feel like I just heard a Dennis Miller joke.

  12. When we advertise an open tenured position, there are typically about 30 applicants who meet the objective requirements ( degree, years of applicable experience, ability to work in US). At most one will get hired, the other 29 will be “denied” a tenured position.

    The decision to hire with tenure in a well-functioning university is a consensus between a majority of the faculty and the university administration. No consensus, no hire. Very often all 30 applicants get denied.

    When you really need someone to do the job and there is no consensus , the usual solution is some kind of contingent (non-tenure) temporary hire. That gives all the people with a legitimate say in it – which includes the administration and the state as an employer – a chance to check the person out without committing.

    Which is what appears to have happened here. Everyone is just fine.

    1. Fine except for having hired her in the first place.

      1. Just to be clear, I’m no fan of Hannah-Jones and her record on the 1619 Project , if not outright disqualifying, would at least mean the position should go to some other candidate with similar qualifications who *hasn’t* been busted. Assuming there were some.

        Having said that, I think you’re wrong if you expect ideological balance in journalism schools and other “soft” disciplines. Even if the process is completely unbiased, or a random drawing, you aren’t going to get anywhere near proportionality with the ideology of the general population. It’s for the same reason you won’t get 50/50 M/F in an engineering program, even with random picks: there’s strong self-selection bias in the applicant pool that started way back before college.

        1. “I think you’re wrong if you expect ideological balance in journalism schools and other “soft” disciplines”

          I certainly did not mean to suggest I believed this.

          Certainly, they should try the experiment of nonideological hiring – they will probably get a “disproportionate” number of progressive lefties – in the sense that the engineering school will get a “disproportinate” number of men* even when they don’t discriminate by sex.

          The benefit of nonideological hiring could be that they will get a better quality of lefty – intelligent and principled ones (albeit ones who preface their independent thought with disclaimers like “I hate Donald Trump but…”).

          *Oops, I mean people who were assigned the male gender at birth and who failed to discover their inner female. Whew, I almost slipped into wrongthink.

        2. there’s strong self-selection bias in the applicant pool that started way back before college.

          This does not prove bias is not the driver. Universities are openly hostile to non-leftists, absurdly so outside of a handful of productive departments. Imagine a post-Civil Rights Acts business including “whites only” on their help wanted sign and defending themselves when sued by claiming no blacks applied.

        3. Its not “ideological balance”. Its about lying and misrepresenting actual history.

    2. So what you’re telling me is that after publishing outright falsehoods peddled as fact and getting called on it repeatedly even by people on “her side”, this “red state” university is still going to giver her taxpayer dollars for it? What the actual fuck?

      1. The whole education system needs to be burned down, beginning with “higher” education

        1. Let student loans be dischargable in bankruptcy, plus some minor tinkering with the clawback rules, and the problem will damn near solve itself. Universities, banks, and the Feds fighting like cats in a sack over the bad paper—besides being PPV-worthy—will do more to end the silliness of modern higher education than any other reforms coming out of D.C.

          1. The most promising thing I’ve heard all week.

            And I will indeed pay to watch it.

          2. Well we could actually solve the problem by allowing BK for student loans and getting rid of all the federal and state programs pushing loans on unqualified borrowers.

            But instead let’s throw a few trillion dollars of gasoline on the fire by discharging student loans. No moral hazard there.

            1. What do you think “discharging” means in this context? If I meant ‘forgive’ student loans, I’d have said, “forgive.” For fuck’s sake, I used the word “bankruptcy” in the first sentence.

              I agree with you that simply writing it off would be a very bad idea. So, that’s likely exactly what Congress’ll do.

          3. I’ve suggested this a number of times. If there’s a good chance they won’t get paid back, the people lending the money will be a lot more cautious about who they lend it to. To the limit they are allowed to be careful by law.

        2. This episode is entirely of a piece with the cheerleader who got kicked off the squad for her intemperate language.

          Although many in academia tell themselves it is different that is just based upon the level of gloss. At base the fundament is the same.

  13. It occurs to me that it’s the faculty engaging in viewpoint discrimination by appointing her.

    Do they have a habit of appointing, let’s say, right-wing journalists who write shoddy scholarship on America being a Christian nation? Would they appoint John Lott, or would they suddenly discover the problems with his research? Etc.

    1. It might be fun to see if a professor who maintains Trump won the election would be able to get tenure.

      He may be wrong, even outright lying. But that didn’t stop this asshole from getting a steady paycheck, even if tenure was delayed (my money says she gets tenured eventually, probably quietly after the spotlight has faded).

  14. The tears are welling up.

    1. Was this author writing about all of the others that have careers ruined, not just denied tenure? STFU.

      1. Robbie still thinks his career has potential.

        1. I see him making the leap to something bigger before almost anyone else who writes here. Maybe Weigel and McArdle’s career paths are temporarily closed to him, but I can see him getting a gig somewhere like that.

          1. Yep, that’s what Robby sees too. But those path closures are not temporary. Those types of jobs are gone and never coming back.

            1. And he does lack the fire to be our Ilya Ehrenburg. As well as the required ancestry and sex.

              Bummer for him.

  15. “while all the details are not known, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint.”

    No it isn’t Robby. Given the serious flaws in the 1619 Project that you and countless others have pointed out, given that a fellow journalist at her own newspaper called her out on its serious flaws, and given her utter failure to engage in academic debate or defense of her arguments, I would say that there is ample reason to question the quality of her scholarship and to put her on a five-year contract – and just as much reason to suspect that she was offered a position more because of her notoriety and less because of her academic skills.

  16. Next up at the NYTimes, the 1519 Project, blaming Mexico’s woes on the Yucatan Maya who enslaved a shipwrecked Moor there two years before AOC’s granddad Cortez made the scene.

  17. It’s not about academic freedom. It’s about academic fraud.

    1. The fraud was hiring her at all.

      That was purely a political payoff. Long march Marxists misusing educational funds for their political goals.

  18. many historians (and not just those on the political right) have objected to both the project’s framing and certain claims that it makes. Hannah-Jones has not always engaged these critics in good faith.

    Sounds like a great tenure candidate.

  19. “…even winning a Pulitzer Prize…”

    Right up there with the Nobel Peace Prize.

    1. And an Emmy Award for Andrew Cuomo, a Profiles in Courage Award for Gretchen Whitmer…

    2. Wasn’t the Pulitzer prize awarded to a literal hoax and never rescinded even years after the hoax was debunked, multiple times?

      1. Several times, including very recently

  20. Soave misses the libertarian point (this problem exists because government is far too involved in the education business rather than defending free markets) and instead focuses on the question if denying academic tenure (a government created policy) threatens “academic freedom”. In free markets, educational institutions would focus on educating customers. IMHO “Academic freedom” in this context is really a euphemism for a government created overpaid lifetime job awarded for political purposes. It shouldn’t be defended.

    1. If you go with the “customer service” model for education then you have to face the unfortunate fact that there is a market for what Hannah-Jones is selling.

      1. Not if you remove Gov gaurentee loans

      2. The only “buyers” using government funding.

      3. I’ve got no problem with the market for what Hannan-Jones is selling. The point is, in a free market, institutions will seek to offer what students want, and as a result, students/parents will have the ability to choose a school that meets their needs. Conservative parents/students won’t be forced to support such professors via government money given/granted to such schools.

        As for tenure, that is also possible in private schools, but when government isn’t involved in education, that becomes a contractual matter between the school and the professor. There’s no need to protect a professor for their political views. But IMHO tenure doesn’t work, as you can see by the efforts to cancel conservative professors. Tenure is a government institution created by government meddling in education, that wouldn’t be a problem with private schools.

  21. The surprising move raises concerns about academic freedom.

    Are we really saying denying tenure to someone who ‘authored’ a fake history of America is a threat to academic freedom?

    Is it to be expected that grifters, con artists, OPEN RACISTS, should be given free reign in academia?

    How about anti-vaxxers?

    1. Obviously, who is hired is just as political as who is fired. Which explains why they’re hiring propagandists these days. This position for Hannah-Jones looks like an award, rather than an actual professorship, considering she’s employed by the NYT. Does she plan to resign her position to teach (or it seems a lot of these ____ studies professors just write, including writing for grants)?

      The way I see this, is the political elite are directing the universities to indoctrinate students rather than educate them. This wouldn’t be a problem if education was delivered in a free market.

  22. objected to both the project’s framing and certain claims that it makes.

    I think you mean ‘called them outright lies.’

  23. Her most notorious work has been criticized for being bad history and she has responded to those criticisms in an unbecoming fashion. This is what is being considered viewpoint discrimination?

    What this shows is that journalism nowadays is more about stature and endorsing the progressive narrative rather than an adherence to truth, hence the Pulitzer and her invitation by the journalism school faculty.

    1. Yes, unfortunately government is heavily involved in both education, the Pulitzer prize, and even journalism.

      Government involvement in journalism isn’t like its direct legislative/regulatory meddling in other business, and it’s more like how business capture the regulatory agencies meant to regulate them. Big government has captured the news business via numerous means including, limiting access to friendly journalists (especially all those anonymous sources, many who’ve lied to the MSM and defrauded the public, and which the MSM has chosen to not reveal showing their collusion with government), the revolving door between journalism and jobs working for politicians (such as speech writer, communications, etc.), federal licensing, etc.

  24. Hannah-Jones has not always engaged these critics in good faith.

    Ever. The word you’re looking for is ‘ever’.

    You can’t engage people who call out your bald-faced lies ‘in good faith’.

  25. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism,

    Sure, if ‘everything is racists, everything is sexist’ is your standard.

    And really, what is ‘teaching race’ anyway? What does that mean to you Soave?

    1. Soave is a child. Like a fish doesn’t see the water in which it swims he is equally blind to the Marxist Critical Theory Kool aid that permeated his schooling.

  26. it’s hard to escape the conclusion that she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint.

    I guess lying and race-baiting are politically disfavored viewpoints.

    1. If overt racism is expressing a disfavored viewpoint, I’ll run with that.

    1. He has never had to hit anyone in his entire privileged life, has he?

    2. That’s just silly.

      They should all learn the Vulcan neck pinch.

    3. With the amount of roids these guys are on, their grappling abilities are pathetic.

  27. But this appointment has come with controversy. It was expected that Hannah-Jones would be granted a tenure-track position; instead, she received a non-tenured five-year appointment, with an option for tenure once it expires. According to the Times, UNC-Chapel Hill’s board of trustees has some say over this outcome, and may have been motivated to deny Hannah-Jones tenure due to conservatives’ objections to her work.

    Wait, was it conservatives who objected to her work or was it honest historians who had objections with her work? This sure is a fun game to play.

    1. Wait, was it conservatives who objected to her work or was it honest historians who had objections with her work? This sure is a fun game to play.

      Yeah, I’m not sure what Robby’s driving at here. If the board was so concerned about what conservatives thought of their tenured faculty choices, about 95% of the professoriate wouldn’t have even gotten their positions in the first place.

      The fact that this Bozo-haired buffoon even has a job in academia is enough of an indictment on the institution itself.

    2. Correct. She has zero qualifications as a historian and her qualifications as a journalist are suspect at best. What she’s qualified for is as an activist. Which means she’s qualified to grab a bullhorn and blather on the campus quad.

      Colleges already hire too many ideologues that have at least been able to grift a bunch of fancy letters to add after their name. We really don’t need to hire ideologues who even lack those.

  28. She’s a hack who has been discredited, but robby is woke thus the tears.

  29. Isn’t the red hair cultural appropriation from the Irish?

    1. Isn’t the red hair cultural appropriation from the Irish?

      Hollywood has already blackfaced multiple red-headed comic book characters in its movies and TV shows, she’s just following the cultural trend.

      1. Good omens on Amazon is a good example. The made pepper black and destroyed the motif. Pepper was suppose to be a freckely redhead that mirrored the red horseman war, but they needed a black kid in there somewhere, so they pick the only charecter where color actually adds to the plot

        1. Did they not realize that Famine rides a black horse?

          1. But famine is bad so he has to be yt.

    2. Cultural appropriation from starving Africans. Looking like a Kwashiorkor victim isn’t what I’d find fashionable, but anorexics walk the runway, so shrug.

      1. Doesn’t that cause gastric distension?

        1. It does, in the photos I’ve seen. In her case, I think she’s simply orca-fat.

    3. Shes obviously not one, but there are black people that have red hair and freckles. I dont know if its a genetic thing like albinism, but I am pretty sure it isnt a mixed race thing.

      Semi-related; red heads have the most banging asses of all the “white” women.

  30. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism,
    Sure. I guess so. As it’s practiced today. No need for seeking truth, just push the desired narrative.
    The fact that her 1619 Project is fundamentally dishonest should make her a pariah in the world of academia. The fact she was even offered this position shows how corrupt the academy is these days.

    1. “Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism,”
      what a fucking niche of academia, race in journalism? call some people racists, use twitter for references, and now your an expert and get tenure. never mind her biggest work of journalism was a complete farce.

  31. I’ll bet if I search the cucks were defending Ward Churchill. Ya see even if you make up shit whole cloth that’s academic freedom.

  32. That said, it’s clear the faculty within the journalism department wished for this to be a tenured position, and that it’s rare for the trustees to overrule the faculty’s wishes in matters such as this. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism

    So the conclusion here is one (1) university has dithered on a crazy-pants candidate receiving a tenured position for what was… at minimum, shoddy academic work.

    Why is this a controversy?

    1. Or are we just pretending Michael Bellesiles never happened.

      1. The controversy should be that she was hired at all.

  33. I never expected it !

  34. “It’s rare for the trustees to overrule the faculty’s wishes….” What’s your point Robby? Just because it’s rare doesn’t mean it’s not without merit. Maybe the faculty normally has reasonable wishes, and maybe that’s not the case here. Argue the case on the merits.

    1. woke professor denied tenure by the conservative trustees in a red legislative state for a publicly funded university

  35. I predicted ENB being the one to get upset over this, not Robby…. but now I assume ENB was so angry she couldn’t even get the words out.

    1. Sputtering with rage, no doubt. Oh the injustice, I can’t even…

    2. Is being a mendacious, racist bitch equivalent to being a sex worker? Why would ENB care?

  36. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism,

    Is she? She’s certainly qualified in how to pass off ideological wishful thinking as history. Is that the same thing as journalism? Why is it a problem that at least some people think these should be different.

    she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint.

    It seems more likely she was only a candidate because she expressed politically favored viewpoints.

    this decision has disturbing implications for academic freedom, which is vital in allowing faculty members to voice divergent views and in avoiding casting what the Supreme Court called a ‘pall of orthodoxy’ over the classroom,

    How is adding the 10,451st espouser of left wing orthodoxy to a population of 10,459 voicing “divergent views”? Clearly the trustees should keep out of this so we can eliminate those other 8 in favor of more diverse voices.

    1. ^^^^^ This. ^^^^^

    2. ya this.

    3. “It seems more likely she was only a candidate because she expressed politically favored viewpoints.”

      Occam’s razor agrees.

    4. “she was only a candidate because she expressed politically favored viewpoints.”

      +1000

      Is Robby really unable to see this?

    5. I honestly can’t think of a more politically favored viewpoint at this time than ‘America Is Built on Systemic Racism’.

  37. “Hannah-Jones has not always engaged these critics in good faith.”

    Has she ever engaged with critics in good faith? Anyone have a link for that?

    No, she pushed an ideology based on a narrative that did not wash with, as you put it, “many historians (and not just those on the political right).” And naturally any criticism of such wokefullness, all the more so regarding a black woman, is automatically derided as racist, misogynist, or oppressive.

    I suppose UNC will be trashed all Summer until the trustees walk back their decision to provide a “victory” for the “systematically oppressed.”

  38. I wonder what she needs tenure for. Would the university actually dare to fire her, whatever she teaches or how poorly she does it?

    1. Tenure is granted to scholars in order to free them to write whatever shit they want without worrying that they might lose their job over it. I’m pretty sure that the 1619 Project is proof positive that this creature is already free to write whatever shit she wants without worrying it might cost her her job – in fact, she won awards for writing some of the most godawful horseshit imaginable. What’s she need tenure for?

      1. She is clearly not as bright as Kendi. He’s managed to make the grift quite lucrative with all sorts of corporate speaking engagements and round tables.

      2. Good protection for when it is time for progressives to eat one of their own. Right now, things are ‘progressing’ so fast that whatever gets written now, has a good chance of being considered to be completely regressive in two decades.

  39. It sure shows chutzpah when the establishment succeeds in getting a prestigious professorship for an unqualified person and manages to work up a controversy because the terms of her employment ought to have been even more generous than they are.

  40. >>motivated to deny Hannah-Jones tenure due to conservatives’ objections to her work

    do they usually give tenure to comic book writers?

  41. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9596907/UNC-backs-offering-1619-Project-author-Nikole-Hannah-Jones-tenured-position.html

    Hannah-Jones, meanwhile, said on Twitter that ‘history, in general, is contested. The project unsettled many. I think that is good.’

    Consider yourself unsettled, Hannah-Jones.

    1. Well, the holocaust is still contested too, isn’t it?

      1. And I just realized that that’s probably where the left is going next.

        1. That is sadly, probably a good bet.

      2. Goddamnit, why’d you have to shoot off the Misek flare?

        The Holocaust is only going to start getting disputed by these people when they feel that Jews have much less utility for their purposes than anti-Semitic new immigrants. We’ve nowhere near enough Muslims for that to happen. I’d think it’d be different in someplace like France or Russia. Not that Russians need help there, historically.

        1. I am pretty sure Russia was the original Holocaust denier. The official Soviet position was from the very beginning that all people suffered equally under the Nazis and there was no special targeting of Jews.

    2. You know who else unsettled people?

      1. Arab and African slave traders?

      2. The Huns?

  42. >>even winning a Pulitzer Prize

    Walter. Duranty.

      1. Since the 1980’s, the paper has been publicly acknowledging his failures.

        Half a century later, when it doesn’t matter anymore, they throw him under the bus.

        But Duranty wasn’t an aberration. The NYT has been sympathizing with fascists and communists for a century, and they continue to do so.

        1. They finally admitted that he was a liar in the 1980s. Gareth Jones proved Duranty a liar at the time. Robert Conquest established it beyond any doubt in 1968. The Times still pretended he wasn’t until the mid 1980s. What a disgraceful publication.

  43. Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism, and while all the details are not known, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint.

    Guilty as charged: American taxpayers disfavor socialism, fascism, and racism, and are unwilling to pay for people to teach this to their kids. That’s why the board put a stop to it. Good for the board. Maybe they can do some more house cleaning at the university, under threat of cutting funding.

    You have to be some kind of totalitarian to believe that taxpayers ought to be forced to pay for the hiring of teachers who teach ideologies they find objectionable.

    1. “That’s why the board put a stop to it.”

      No, they approved a five-year appointment.

      Which will probably become tenure if this ginned-up “academic freedom” controversy gets legs, as the media will make sure happens.

      1. The board did not approve a five year appointment. She got the five year appointment because the university can do that without board approval.

        1. I beg your pardon.

          I’m still struggling with your sentence: “American taxpayers disfavor socialism, fascism, and racism, and are unwilling to pay for people to teach this to their kids. That’s why the board put a stop to it.”

          In fact, the board didn’t “put a stop to” the teaching of racism, they simply tried to put a 5-year time limit on it, and even that may not stick.

          In other words, you sounded over-optimistic. Although taxpaying voters seem to disapprove of racism, even in California, it’s still policy in many places.

          And look at the terms in which this debate is being framed. Instead of the university facing backlash for giving a 5-year faculty appointment to an agenda-driven hack, the protests are against the fact that her appointment wasn’t for even longer.

          1. In fact, the board didn’t “put a stop to” the teaching of racism, they simply tried to put a 5-year time limit on it, and even that may not stick.

            The board did what they could: they denied her tenure. That’s the extent of their powers in this case. They don’t have the power to intervene in day-to-day teaching or regular teaching appointments.

            I’m not “optimistic” at all. I was simply pointing out that it is perfectly legitimate for the board to deny tenure to NHJ.

  44. Good, she should be denied tenure. Not because of her political views but because she’s a hack who has demonstrated an inability to do basic research of history – which is kind of important to good journalism.

    ‘Academic freedom’ does not mean that one must tolerate incompetence.

    1. I don’t know how you call her work incompetence. She produced exactly what she, the NYT, the Journalism Faculty of UNC, and virtually every leftist in the country wanted. That her work is a complete fabrication is not relevant as accuracy is not a goal for her or her employer.

      Her work is more a demonstration of corruption than incompetence.

      1. If some university creates a tenured chair in the the art of the con, Hannah-Jones will be a fine choice for the position.

        1. That’s what this chair is, isn’t it?

  45. “Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism, ”

    When did Reason get taken over by the Washington Post?

    1. Where you been for the last eight years?

    2. Reason reflects society: its staff consists of two major groups. The first is boomers that say liberal things but have turned out to be nasty left-wing authoritarians. The second is the woke younger generation that thinks that progressivism and socialism bring people liberty.

      1. Are they boomers? Aren’t they more Baby Bust/Gen Xers?

  46. I heard she’s a DUKE fan

  47. In other news, Robby Soave argues that revoking Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize raises concerns about freedom of the press.

  48. Tenure is never guaranteed and considering how her whole 1619 project has been admitted as a lie and not history then no she doesn’t deserve shit. BTW she still has a job with tenure in five years. there is no controversy except by the media and probably her for not getting her cake today.

  49. she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint”

    tell that to the several tenured university professors who were fired for not going along with climate change.

  50. https://twitter.com/wokal_distance/status/1395460875167834112?s=19

    1/
    You need to understand that this is deliberate.
    When a “progressive” does something wrong it,s met with a *shrug* and mild criticism
    When anyone else does it, the media flood the zone with coverage to create pressure to have the person fired.
    It’s a deliberate tactic.
    “NEW: Chris Cuomo took part in strategy calls advising his brother, the New York governor, on how to respond to sexual harassment allegations. CNN agrees it was “inappropriate” but says the anchor will not be disciplined.
    By @jdawsey1 @sarahellison [link]”
    2/
    Chris Cuomo works for CNN and helped his brother bury a sexual harassment story the network he works for had reported on
    Now hear me out:
    THE IMPORTANT STORY HERE IS *NOT* ABOUT THE CUOMO BROTHERS, THE IMPORTANT STORY IS ABOUT THE FACT THEY ARE BOTH GOING TO GET AWAY WITH IT
    3/
    The asymmetry is the story.
    Let me say that again so no one misses the point
    **THE ASYMMETRY IS THE STORY **
    When Fox news softballs conservatives there’s endless coverage and countless RT’s of angry journalists upset that fox would undercut the integrity of journalism…
    4/
    But that same energy and the demands for “accountibility” disappear as soon as progressive colludes with media to bury a story.
    There are a few tactics that make this work, so let’s discuss them….
    5/
    The first is to demand accountability, when a conservative or centrist does it, but ask for second chances when a progressive does it.
    The call for accountability is used to remove conservatives, and calls for second chances are used as a way to protect progressives
    6/
    Another way they do this is through framing:
    When a centrist or conservative does something awful the framing is “that reporter did a bad thing and can’t be trusted”
    When a progressive does something awful the framing is “conservatives seize on reporting mistake”
    See that?
    7/
    In the first case they focus on the awful behavior on the conservative reporter, in the second case they focus on the reaction to the behavior of the progressive reporter.
    Another tactic is to decide which stories get oxygen and get promoted in order to control the narrative.

    1. +1 Republicans Pounce

      The whole schtick is so worn, obvious and pathetic, I am left to wonder why people like Soave even bother. I would have more respect for Soave if he had just written “it doesn’t matter what she did, she is a progressive and should get tenure because fuck you.” Such a column would at least have the virtues of brevity and honesty, which is more would be more virtue than there is to what Soave actually wrote, which granted isn’t saying much.

      1. +1. A so-called professor who repeatedly lied to advance her career is not “eminently qualified” to teach anyone anything. Except to serve as a bad example after they put her away for fraud.

      2. Robby needs to bury his leftist ideology in a word salad so that you don’t notice it as readily. After all, the point of Reason these days seems to be to mislead people into believing that libertarianism is “liberalism” (i.e., progressivism) for incels and racists.

  51. To begin with, tenure is a bogus concept. Educators teaching one three hour class a semester, producing research that nobody reads and only other academics semi-understand, or fake that they do. Nearly all the “professional” publications are hidden behind paywalls to avoid real scrutiny.

    Making up history and passing it off as a researched product does not even justify a teaching position for a biased reporter. Not all that write can teach writing and someone with a biased agenda should not be teaching journalism when objectivity has been sorely missing.

  52. Of course it’s viewpoint discrimination. The trustee did not want a racist on the faculty. The only thing new about this is that the viewpoint discrimination affected a leftist. They’ve been denying conservatives tenure due to their viewpoints for decades. Pot meet kettle.

    1. Malicious lies are simply not “viewpoints” worthy of respect. And the 1619 Project, just like “anti-racism”, is nothing but malicious lies.

  53. There are zero reasons to not celebrate this as some sort of victory

    1. This fraudster is still being paid a salary to teach. A victory would be firing her from the university entirely.

  54. What is the issue here? Another poorly thought out article, an “academic” being treated exactly like any other academic would be treated? The 1619 Project is a pathetic and inaccurate portrayal of history. It is either produced by a blatant racist or a complete incompetent, neither of which should be teaching at a respected university. So it looks like she got off easy. Her work is a lie but it is also damaging and from all the evidence I have seen set out to be divisive. But I think that supporting this nut may actually be worse than being the nut. Objectively, the history to make the case of this theory is made up and incorrect. The irony is that if she were white she would have been ignored long ago with the incompetent work she put out.

  55. She’s should apply at Hamburger U. From the looks of her she can say Ronald McDonald recommended her.

  56. Sorry Robby, but an ACADEMIC is obligated to assure their research and resultant work based upon it is ACCURATE. This 1619 sham is NOT. They did well denying her tenure. TO grant such a sloppy “scholar) tenure is to assure an extended period of time to allow her to do even more harmful “work” based on her personal opinions and clearly in opposition to fact and/or relality.

    Academic Freedom is a thing… but lying, false “data”, corrupted research, political motivation, are NOT part of “academic freedom”.

    Glad this creature does not have a ilfetime free pas plus support to continue in her destructive activities.

  57. If she’s fundamentally dishonest and doesn’t engage respectfully with criticism then I don’t know why you feel the need to say ‘is eminently qualified’ to teach anything we actually care to have the truth about.

    This would be like saying Dennis Prager is eminently to teach journalism. He isn’t, not if we think journalism should have any bearing on reality, and the same goes for Hannah-Jones.

    The only way in which should might be qualified is if we all believe that race in journalism just doesn’t matter as a subject so anybody will do.

  58. https://twitter.com/thekangminlee/status/1395233669695123456?s=19

    25-year-old Brittany Kennedy savagely beats 22-year-old Emily Broadwater in front of her infant daughter in a Little Caesar’s in Georgia.

    White supremacy is truly the biggest threat in America today right?
    [Video]

  59. https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1395489649917890560?s=19

    This should be interpreted through the Iron Law of Woke Projection. Best to pay attention to what they’re signaling. The Left moves dialectically. This rhetoric isn’t merely histrionics and theatrics. It’s telegraphing and operationally preparing the domain of activism.

    “.@AOC on the Capitol riot: “This was an all-out attempted coup … 60 seconds could have meant potentially the difference between what we have right now and a martial state. And we don’t want to acknowledge that that’s how close we got.” [Link]”

    1. “.@AOC on the Capitol riot: “This was an all-out attempted coup … 60 seconds could have meant potentially the difference between what we have right now and a martial state. And we don’t want to acknowledge that that’s how close we got.” [Link]”

      To repeat: The claim that an agent should be charged with an attempt to do X *MUST* include a demonstrable method to accomplish X. AOC’s claim that 60 seconds had any possibility of affecting the outcome of the protest is bullshit and needs to be rejected as such.
      AOC might just as well claim that the protesters were training pigs to fly and shit on AOC. Which would be a far better result.

  60. The wonder is she was offered any teaching position at all. Her claim to fame, the 1619 Project, has too much ahistorical BS, as called by prominent historians both White & Black, that it’s indoctrination, not history. In fact, the only part of the entire project written by historians is the non-controversial part describing Jim Crow & the Civil Rights Era.

    1. Indoctrination is the purpose of universities these days.

  61. Robby thinks that academic freedom in the US might be lost because of this? How can what doesn’t exist be lost? Does every third or fourth article really have to be this nonsensical for Robby to feel objective?

    1. You’re right

  62. Robby, you clearly don’t understand the problem. Refusing tenure to Jones cannot possibly be a threat to academic freedom because there is NO ACADEMIC FREEDOM. You cannot threaten that which does not exist.

    Now that the Left sees that it can happen to them as well as their enemies, the possibility exists that Mutual Assured Destruction will bring peace to the academy. When another dozen or so left wing academics find themselves standing beside a road carrying a sign “Will preach communism for food” then there will be a proper incentive to establish academic freedom. Until then, the side that preaches “Repressive Tolerance” (see Herbert Marcuse) must be made to feel the full pain of their own beliefs forced upon them.

  63. “Academic freedom” is not a synonym for “rewards for doing shitty work”.

  64. An out of context/fabrication of history does not deserve recognition with tenure. Just like Howard Zinns fabrications in a people’s history. I am for free speech not biased revisionism.

    1. Robby, meanwhile, is on the fence.

  65. Free speech is one thing, revisionist propaganda is another. Her work should come with a warning label. Warning! “This writing may insult your intelligence”.

    1. “That’s funny, I don’t feel insulted.” /wokester

    2. History that doesn’t insult our intelligence includes Washington and a cherry tree, right?

      1. Shitstain needs help dragging strawmen around.

      2. What? It’s a trivial story that everyone knows is apocryphal. Nothing like this.

  66. https://twitter.com/YossiGestetner/status/1395519765108645890?s=19

    BREAKING in the #DiamondDistrict:
    (I don’t know the source of the video)

    Video: Moments earlier, a device went off in what is said to be in the #DiamondDistrict in NYC: [video]

  67. Crazy lying bitch don’t get lifetime free ride suckling on the taxpayer tit. Clearly libertarians must whine about this grave misjustice. Thanks Robbie. If not for you I might have missed this terrifying assault on liberty.

  68. If you were looking for a way to earn some extra income every week… Look no more!!!! Here is a great opportunity for everyone to make $95/per hour by working in your free time on your computer from home… I’ve been doing this for 6 months now and last month i’ve earned my first five-figure paycheck ever!!!! Learn more about it on following link… http://worknet30.com/

  69. Soave is confused – he thinks Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism (what does he mean?) and that academic freedom is threatened by denying tenure to a professor who [actually] teaches racism through journalism.

    Hannah-Jones may be eminently qualified to teach racism in journalism, but who thinks that such teaching should be paid for by taxpayers, even if someone did give her an award. Academic freedom cannot exist in government-financed education. Those in power will always use education to further their power. Education and the state must be separated for academic freedom to exist.

  70. Since I started with my online business, I earn $25 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable but you won’t forgive yourself if you don’t check it out.

    Learn more about it here..

    ……………………… http://www.Cash44.club

  71. Every last one of you fuckers came here expecting to have your race boners stroked while you cheered on someone’s canceling because she isn’t in your tribe.

    I don’t want to drop any bombshells, but wielding torches over school curricula for children is not a traditionally libertarian concern. You’re not supposed to acknowledge children exist.

    Fucking culture war. The problem in this world is weak minds.

    1. “…because she isn’t in your tribe.”

      Shitstain here can’t spell “because she’s a fucking racist and a liar”>

    2. I don’t even know whether she is “in my tribe” or not, if I have one. One can disagree with a person regardless of rather than because of their skin tone, especially if that person is not only objectively wrong but is dismissive of criticism instead of answering it (really poor scholarship).

      That you decide who to support because of the level of melanin in their skin does not mean that the rest of us do. Stop projecting your racism onto others.

      1. I didn’t mention skin color.

        I’m only pointing out the contradiction in supposed libertarians aligning with the right wing. They’re supposed to spark moral panics over whether schoolbooks jerk off to cultural symbolism enough. Libertarians are supposed to, I dunno, let the children decide what to learn? Start their own history book publishing businesses?

        The point is to realize the emptiness of the controversy. Its sum total is the irrational anxieties of conservatives who think their tribe is under attack. And it is, because their culture is stuffed full of nationalistic racist mythologies. I think it’s far from certain whether this misguided woke curriculum, the standard textbooks, or whatever North Korea-esque replacement conservatives have in mind is the least full of lies.

        My position is I don’t think children are ready for all the horrors of US history, and that they will grow up and be able to learn about it at the appropriate time. But they should also not be spoonfed a history that continues to assert that only the contributions of white slaveowners mattered.

  72. What a news!

  73. Hannah-Jones’s work (including the 1619 Project) embodied poor, even motivated, scholarship. Such is perfectly sound reason for denying (or deferring) tenure. I hope tenure is permanently withheld in her egregious case.

  74. It’s probably worth pointing out that hiring *with tenure* is incredibly rare, and generally only for professors who *already have tenure elsewhere*. Tenure-track (5-6 years with possibility of tenure) is normal.

    I wouldn’t have even given her a tenure track position. Her scholarship, if such a word even applies, is terrible.

  75. “Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism, and while all the details are not known, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint.”

    Robby should note that Jones’ Magnum opus work is an act of race-baiting historical revisionism. Her eminent qualification is that even though her work was obvious crap, the Pullitzer committee granted her journalism’s highest honor because they don’t actually care to promote good journalism anymore. She is neither an honest journalist, not someone who reports truthfully or responsibly about race. She instead peddles in ill-advised racist opinions. That sounds like the least qualified person to handle the job.

    Also of note, she was not given tenure immediately. She was just slow-tracked to get tenure after a trial period, which is standard for someone entering the professorial profession with no real body of academic works, much less her aforementioned abysmal qualifications.

  76. Hannah-Jones is a masterful creative writer and has been awarded for her historical fiction. Actual historians have noted the many errors in facts. NYT has quietly edited many of the more glaring mistakes. Journalists don’t have to be accurate to receive journalistic awards. She is masterful in creative writing, propaganda, self promotion , and an ability to shape an agenda. She is immensely qualified for a tenured position in creative writing, communication, art of persuasion but, anything based upon accurate and factual information/ research would not be appropriate.

  77. Does any university offer a tenure-track position to a person who lacks a doctoral degree?

  78. For those that don’t know just how bad Jones’s scholarship or reasoning is: She claimed that the reason for the American Revolution was so that the colonies could keep their slaves. But British law clearly supported slavery in all British colonies at this time – and continued to support it long after the Revolution. Parliament only ended slavery in the remaining colonies in 1833, fifty years after the Revolution was won. Some of the northern colonies had tried to ban slavery before the Revolution, and been overruled by their British governors.

    So the southern states that depended economically on slave plantations had no worries about the British interfering with their institution, but felt worried enough about the northern states to demand a few clauses in the Constitution protecting slavery from federal interference; the 3/5 compromise, the right to pursue fugitive slaves across state lines, and that the importation of slaves could not be banned until 1808. And this concern seems somewhat justified; Congress banned the importation of slaves in early March 1807, nearly 10 months before the act could take effect on January 1, 1808. The British Parliament matched this with an act in March 1807 that banned the transatlantic slave trade, to take effect in 1808.

    The northern and central states were finally free to make their own rules about slavery; some banned it immediately, while others thought about it for a few years, then passed laws that only gradually freed their slaves. E.g., New York freed slaves depending on their birth date, with the last ones freed only in 1827, and New Jersey was even slower. But every state north of New Jersey had freed all their slaves before the first slaves were freed by law in the sugar plantations of the British West Indies.

  79. Parents are uniting to keep this and critical race theory out of schools. It is bad enough it is used to indoctrinate colleges. Teaching that everything White Americans have done is wrong and evil and then demanding to be equal to them and have all the same rights is a real head scratcher. Especially when they say it is because of Whites they can’t be equally evil and depraved as Whites are. If everyone was held to the same standards in the US what would happen in the inner cities and urban gang wars? I know how it would go if White gangs began attacking White communities. If necessary the National Guard would be called out to restore the peace using whatever force is necessary.

  80. “Hannah-Jones is eminently qualified to teach race in journalism, and while all the details are not known, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that she was punished for expressing a politically disfavored viewpoint”

    Being a racist journalist does not qualify one to teach race in journalism. I would argue it is disqualifying. As for disfavoured viewpoint, how about just plain falsehood in support of an untenable political viewpoint? That is the 1619 project.

  81. Misleading headline. She was just given 5 years to do whatever she wants and will not have to compile annual evaluation notebooks or do any committee work like a tenure-track faculty normally does. While the UNC-Woke-a-university waits out the inevitable defeat of the conservative holdouts, THEN she will be given some kind of tenure. Truly a misleading headline. True headline: Hannah-Jones given unprecedented sweet deal; tenure process delayed till 2026

  82. Ask me how much I care about any professor’s tenure. You want academic freedom? Maybe level the field a little more for the adjuncts.

  83. So this woman hates America, thinks the Constitution is a slaveholders’ document, and wants to trash Jefferson and other beacons of liberty. And of course, REASON has to defend her.

    You gotta start understanding the friend-enemy distinction.

Comments are closed.