quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Gotta love that non-hating, liberal tolerance of all viewpoints:

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/conservative-muslim-student-mocks-liberals-gets-suspended-campus-paper-apartment-vandalized

And more evidence of the love of vigorous discourse: "This deliberate effort, packaged as “Michigan in Color,” is an endless parade of trigger warnings, microaggressions, and the like. From a free speech perspective, the content is not the problem; news outlets should feel free to run whatever they like—that’s the whole point. But all too often, people who hold the far-left perspective on these issues are willing to resort to censorship to protect their positions."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


Your post states that, "the article in question was not censored, since it's still there on the college paper's website, along with an article he has written since then. So, he wasn't fired nor did he have to resign nor was anything actually censored." There are two problems with these claims.

Firstly, the linked article at Truth Revolt says nothing whatsoever about him being "censored," or about his article being removed, and the Reason link (which your quote omits) only mentions censorship in the general context of "rampant illberalism."

quote:


In other progressive news, the terms "red" and "green" create a hostile environment for our color-blind minority and should no longer be used.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

"That many untrained and uneducated see colleges and universities as 'liberal bastions'. When reality is quite different"

since I've not been reading intimately, I may be missing some of the context of that statement, or its implied meaning, or if its somehow supposed to sarcasm, but as to the plain meaning of the words: that's actually a pretty shocking statement...

and id be happy to go on at length as to just how colleges and universities are indeed "liberal bastions"...and risk showing myself as "untrained and uneducated" in the process.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


Your post states that, "the article in question was not censored, since it's still there on the college paper's website, along with an article he has written since then. So, he wasn't fired nor did he have to resign nor was anything actually censored." There are two problems with these claims.

Firstly, the linked article at Truth Revolt says nothing whatsoever about him being "censored," or about his article being removed, and the Reason link (which your quote omits) only mentions censorship in the general context of "rampant illberalism."

Secondly, he was indeed fired. Not by the Michigan Review, but by The Michigan Daily. The Daily informed Mahmood that it didn't like his views, nor apparently the Review, and that if he didn't resign from the latter he would be terminated forthwith. Instead he contacted the Fix, another publication the Daily doesn't like, and was promptly terminated for making "internal politics a subject of publication." A copy of the termination letter is here.

In mid-November, the former columnist authored a column in The Michigan Review, which made his continued involvement with both the Daily and the Review untenable. The way in which the author satirically mocked the experiences of fellow Daily contributors and minority communities on campus in his Review column violated our values and integrity as a publication. His actions created a conflict of interest regarding his employment with both the Daily and the Review... As the leading publication at the University of Michigan, the Daily strives to represent the diversity of viewpoints and narratives present on campus in meaningful, thoughtful ways. ~The Michigan Daily

In other progressive news, the terms "red" and "green" create a hostile environment for our color-blind minority and should no longer be used.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

How dare you mention red and green without a trigger warning?!?!?!?!

Off to my fainting couch.

My face is red with embarrassment.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


Your post states that, "the article in question was not censored, since it's still there on the college paper's website, along with an article he has written since then. So, he wasn't fired nor did he have to resign nor was anything actually censored." There are two problems with these claims.

Firstly, the linked article at Truth Revolt says nothing whatsoever about him being "censored," or about his article being removed, and the Reason link (which your quote omits) only mentions censorship in the general context of "rampant illberalism."

The post and poster to whom I was responding did mention censorship, and that's what I was addressing. I was not referring to the article at Truth Revolt or any other article. I was merely quoting the post made by Creative Dominant and addressing the bolded portion which said "But all too often, people who hold the far-left perspective on these issues are willing to resort to censorship to protect their positions." Whether it came from this link or that link - I don't really know. I just saw it posted here and felt like answering it.

quote:


Secondly, he was indeed fired. Not by the Michigan Review, but by The Michigan Daily. The Daily informed Mahmood that it didn't like his views, nor apparently the Review, and that if he didn't resign from the latter he would be terminated forthwith. Instead he contacted the Fix, another publication the Daily doesn't like, and was promptly terminated for making "internal politics a subject of publication." A copy of the termination letter is here.

Okay, so he was fired by one paper but not the other. But I was able to easily link the original article which is still on the Michigan Review website, and he wrote an article after that, dated in January of this year.

quote:


In mid-November, the former columnist authored a column in The Michigan Review, which made his continued involvement with both the Daily and the Review untenable. The way in which the author satirically mocked the experiences of fellow Daily contributors and minority communities on campus in his Review column violated our values and integrity as a publication. His actions created a conflict of interest regarding his employment with both the Daily and the Review... As the leading publication at the University of Michigan, the Daily strives to represent the diversity of viewpoints and narratives present on campus in meaningful, thoughtful ways. ~The Michigan Daily

This statement doesn't really correspond to what they wrote in his termination letter. The letter mentioned only a conflict of interest and did not say anything about the article in the Review. I'm not sure what the relationship between the Michigan Daily and the Michigan Review. I thought the Review didn't fire him, and as mentioned, he has written a subsequent article dated in January. Did the Michigan Daily have the power to fire him from the Review as well?

quote:


In other progressive news, the terms "red" and "green" create a hostile environment for our color-blind minority and should no longer be used.

There are few people who actually like 'political correctness' but they're often stuck between a rock and a hard place and see it as a necessary evil.

Besides, there's actually censorship all the time, whether people are willing to admit it or not. It can be seen every time you hear the cuss words bleeped out on TV.

quote:

The Associated Students of University of California, Irvine (ASUCI) voted Tuesday to remove all flags, including American flags, from an inclusive space on campus because of their offensive nature...

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6335

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

How dare you mention red and green without a trigger warning?!?!?!?!

Off to my fainting couch.

My face is red with embarrassment.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Another example of the tolerance of different faiths preached for on those oh-so-tolerant campuses today:

UCLA Judicial Council challenges Jewish Student on her faith. During the meeting, video...which has disappeared from YouTube...revealed this question: "Given that you are a Jewish Student and very active in the Jewish community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view as to your position?".
Now...imagine replacing that word 'Jewish' with 'Muslim' or 'gay'...does anybody else hear the outcry that would have provoked?

As you'll see in the story below, the council eventually put her on but ONLY after they initially rejected her...And it took the prodding of a faculty advisor to help them see more clearly.

The chancellor of the university made a brave statement:
The university’s chancellor, Gene D. Block, issued a statement denouncing the attacks on Ms. Beyda. “To assume that every member of a group can’t be impartial or is motivated by hatred is intellectually and morally unacceptable,” he said. “When hurtful stereotypes — of any group — are wielded to delegitimize others, we are all debased.”. One question though for the chancellor...where do you suppose students obtained views counter to yours? Views that deny the impartiality of a Jew? Or a conservative? Or a white, Christian male?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/debate-on-a-jewish-student-at-ucla.html?referrer=

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

Heckler's veto is NOT freedom of speech.