The "N" Word
 

Not wanting to derail Shesus' excellent thread on Who runs the race?, and the recent Imus unpleasantness, I thought the following bore some discussion of its' own.

Link to original article on KETV.com
Well...what have we here? High school journalism students that are being taught and encouraged, not only to think for themselves, but also to tackle the hard topics. The unpleasant topics. And we also have some educators that are courageous enough to back them up.

BUT WAIT...

This just in, from the Seattle Post Intelligencer
Way to go Omaha Public School administrators. You've made national news. Not from the efforts of a gutsy high school paper...but rather for your knee jerk reaction, and your failure to support an excellent educator in her efforts to do what I pay her to do...teach. Frustration doesn't even begin to describe what I'm feeling.

Aye... I feel your pain, BOR. At least the issue hasn't been resolved yet... there's a possibility that upon review, the principal will be reinstated and all will be right with the world again.

Of course I haven't seen the newspaper piece in question, but from the description, it is fairly clear that there was nothing in it worthy of censorship.

It's nice to see some young people dealing critically with the 'n-word' phenomenon rather than being a sad part of it (that is, using speech to confront and subvert racism as opposed to mindlessly perpetuating racism through their speech.)

I tend to view Nigger as a "situational swearword" - in other words, it is sometimes offensive, and sometimes not.

I am a white middle class person, and if I call someone a nigger it is probably offensive.

I have known black guys call their black friends nigger (as in "Yo, Niggaz, Word!") and it is clearly not offensive when used like that.

It's all in the intent.

It's not only in the intent. I bet if you called someone that name, even in a brotherly fashion, you'd have some explaining to do before there was brotherly love between you.

I wonder if the HS journalism students used the word nigger or the replacement N-word. I think that the use of N-word is more offensive than nigger because it tends to suggest that the word is so offensive that the uttering of it in serious dialog about its use is as bad as calling someone a nigger.

We need to teach society that there is no place for calling anyone anything racial instead of suggesting that certain words shouldn't ever be used in any form. Words seem to be big hangups for a good many people rather than the actions suggested by them.

They did use the word "nigger". It was censored (digitized) out in any televised report of the story.

I'm trying to get my hands on a copy of that school newspaper. My daughter graduated from Benson High School, two years ago, and still knows a some of the kids there. If I do get a copy, I'll post the text.

I can't wait for the day when it's ok to say whatever racial slur, sexist, homophobic, anti-religious, anti-political, anti-whatever remark and people would not give a damn about it. Wouldn't that be nice?

I won't comment on the newspaper itself, not having seen it. On the one hand you tend to be proud of the kids for addressing an issue like this - - -on the other hand the reality is that highschool kids don't always choose the most appropriate ways to do so.

But I will say that if it's wrong to call someone a nigger, then it's wrong to call someone a nigger, no matter who is doing the namecalling.

BOR, thanks for sharing. That is a very interesting article.

That would be nice, but I'm not sure that the problem is so much that the language is being used. I think that the problem stems from the fact that people are 1) too PC and uptight and 2) terrified of saying and discussing anything because it could make them look racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.

I really enjoyed reading that article and seeing that some youth in this country are looking at tough issues and addressing them. I hate that they see a negative consequence linked to it. Since I haven't read the article, I can't comment much. However, it seems that they were discussing race relations and linguistics. There shouldn't be a punishment for that because it doesn't seem that it was done in a hateful way, but more as an eye-opener.

So for me, I can't wait for the day that one can make comments and call people on living up to stereotypes they claim to hate, crying victim when it's obvious they are choosing to be in that position, and setting double standards. Words are words, you have to dig deeper into the issue to find the real problem.

Atypical queer xenophobic niggers! IJUHP!

You're missing the point, and that's probably my fault. The kids pretty much dedicated an entire issue, of their school newspaper, to point out that..."certain students"...go around the school all day calling each other "nigger", "bitch", "ho" and so on and so forth. The students question why this allowed to go unchecked. If it's wrong for one, then it's wrong for the other, is their main point.

I'm calling tomorrow to read those idiots the riot act. I hope others will join me.

Benson High School
(402) 557-3000

Omaha Public Schools
(402) 557-2222

uh, Will, very bad idea until you've read the paper in question. . . For all you know the thing was laced with racist hate speech that the students claim was to "make a point." Until you know, you risk making an idiot of yourself.

so you are going to be mad at Benson High School Administrators who allowed it in the first place? You're going to be mad at the School Sytem admistration for reprimanding the school administration?

I don't get your position at all.

yeah the more i think about it...

jump the gun much, knee jerk reaction often?

They can read it to me. Over the phone. The facts are as follows

1) The First Amendment was observed. The words may or may not have been offensive, but the paper was published and the words are out there.
2) The article was about the word 'Nigger' or 'Nigga' or what have you. Media revolving around that word always comes with huge knee jerk reactions. Always. I've never seen the word used in media where it wasn't put under a microscope. Everyone from Pryor to Chapelle to Don Imus has been under that microscope, and it's ALWAYS guilty until proven innocent.
3) There was a printed warning that the content was offensive preceding the article.
4) The students' self explained goal was to stop the word from being used by exploring it.
5) The community put pressure on the district. In other words, people who read a high school newspaper got butt hurt and complained. I wrote articles for my high school paper and never read the damned thing.
6) The district suspended the principal before having an investigation.

Hmmmm....yeah this one is a real noggin scratcher. :orly:

Even if it was hate speech, which there is no evidence to suggest, it's protected speech that was even preceded with a warning that the speech might be offensive. If people are able to read 6 little letters, then they can read the few letters before it explaining that some people aren't mature enough to read the 6 little letters. It's absolutely inexcusable to suspend the principal for this.

the first amendment does not wholly apply to a high school paper. It is legal for the administration to censor the school newspaper.

And we've both seen how teenagers pursue their goals. Sure, some would be able to handle it responsibly. Others would write something that would make the KKK proud, then claim it was to make a point. We do not at this point know what we're dealing with.

There is no such thing as protected speech in high school publications.

What country do you live in where that is the case? We live in the same country?

There are plenty of previous cases where courts have upheld that First Amendment does not apply in schools. Students are not allowed to wear what they want or say what they want.

If you want proof, google it, it should take you 5 minutes to find it, start with Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier.

It's more correct to say that it does not wholly apply to schools. For instance, if this newspaper were produced by the students, with no financial or advisory support from the school, then it would enjoy the same 1st amendment protections as any "real" newspaper.

Also, the school is still subject to certain restrictions on how it controls the newspaper - - they can censor, for example, but they cannot dictate how the students gather the news or who they talk to as sources.

Agreed that it does not wholly apply to schools.

I thought that even rogue publications, solely student sponsored items but distributed on school grounds were also subject the same censoring.

Nope. Administrators often target underground newspapers, trying to get rid of them. And most of the time they're successful because, let's be frank, most of those underground newspapers aren't news, they're hate-filled gossip rags published by idiots. So the idiots don't realize that the administration isn't allowed to go after them.

I should add that while the underground papers enjoy full first amendment protections, they are also subject to other laws, such as libel and slander. And kids generally haven't taken any media ethics or law classes, so they tend to publish things that can get them in trouble legitimately.

Legitimacy is tricky. It seems to rely on public opinion, which varies.
Language will change as we go along: Will "nigger" become less offensive?
duh. It's a meaningless slur, based in the past, where it belongs.

Everyone has a right to say whatever they please. And everyone has a right to condemn it.

I don't think that's a "uptight, pc" thing.

so what did they tell you today? or was it all talk and no cock?

Following is a link to a PDF file of the student newspaper in question.
http://content.omaha.com/media/maps/...songazette.pdf

The controversy begins on page 9. All I see is some students, in a journalistic capapacity, pointing to the 800 pound gorilla in the room, and saying: "Hey, look at that!".

Oh, and by the way, Benson High School Principal, Lisa Dale was reinstated Sunday evening, and was back at work Monday morning. For what it's worth...

And, one more thing...if you read any of the rest of that paper...be aware that the "Bunnies" are the school mascot. So, while the rest of you were "Bulldogs", "Wildcats", "Eagles", "Falcons" and the like...these kids, who border on the roughest area in town...are known as the Benson Bunnies. One thing about it, though...it makes them kick some serious ass on the sports field.

Took me some time to get through the whole thing since I'm at the office, but well done. Bravo for them in putting it as intelligently as possible.

The articles were good, the cartoons were right on the edge of good taste. It was a big mistake to put the first cartoon on page 2 when they didn't start discussing the issue until page 8.

It's not wise to start a racial discussion by dropping "nigger" all over the place, then waiting 6 pages for people to get really good and pissed off before you start making your points.

I felt the "Judge Negro" bit was out of line. In the first place, "negro" is not considered an acceptable way to refer to a black person these days. In the second place, it changes the meaning of the cartoon to a stereotype that ALL black people think it's OK for a black person to call another black person a nigger.

The trouble is that the cartoons degrade the rest of the coverage, which was on the whole good.

That does not, however, mean that I think the paper should have been censored or that anyone should have been suspended over it. Rather, it's a learning experience for these young journalists. They should definitely have consulted with some experts before going to press with this - the Society of Professional Journalists has a hotline set aside specifically for student journalists to call and get advice with any project they're working on.

I am green
my neighbor's depressed
May I feel?

The number for the district has been disconnected. I'm looking for the new number. If anyone has any information, I'd appreciate a PM.

As for the school, no one wanted to discuss it. I spoke to a few administrators, but I wouldn't give my name so it didn't get far.

Why wouldn't you give your name? Afraid much?

Reading someone the riot act anonymously is pretty cowardly. If you truly believe in what you belive, I cannot understand, cannot even fathom why you would not state your name like a big John Hancock. I do call people on a regular basis to make complaints about things, and when I do I give my full name, Cyn T. Hetiq, yes that's Cyn, C-Y-N, because I don't want anyone to make a mistake in my beliefs when I bother to express that belief and associate it mistakenly with someone else. I'll even give them my phone number to call me back if they misunderstood something I said and want further clarification.

But to say that you'd want to do so, then when push comes to shove, you do, and they ask you for your name, and I assume like a child making prank calls, you hang up?

I'm sorry but that my friend is unacceptable in my book and for my lifestyle. While you don't have to seek my approval, I thought you really believed in all that you wrote willing to defend it to it's highest places, you talk the talk. But when it comes down to it, to walk the walk, you took a pass and sat on the bench.

Because I don't want a call from the Idiotsville police.
My voice wouldn't be mistaken for a child's. I sing base. Also, my vocabulary is not to be mistaken for a child's. I wouldn't give my full name and location. I gave my first name following their 'Hello?'. It went a little something like this:
Them: "Blah Blah school."
Me: "Hello, my name is Will and I've recently read about your principal being forced on leave because some of her students wrote an interesting article."
Them: "Who is this?"
Me: "My name is Will."
blah blah blah, it's clear that they weren't going to listen, and intended to report me to the police. I gave them a kind 'have a good day' and that was that. I called to get more information on the story and to see if I could get a hold of who was responsible. What I got was someone uninterested in helping me. What reason would there have been in giving my name when it was clear they had no information for me? Giving out my full name and location would have been a stupid waste of time. I'm not stupid, and I only waste time on The Shield...so there we are.
Did you call? No? Then I'm still ahead of you on the walk the walk chart.

I think a march to Ohama, Nebraska is in order.
Let's see... it's about...1,154 mi.
Hmm...well, in order to obtain answers, it must be necessary to go straight to the source.

What should I say when I get there?

The N word?

...and add fuel to the fire??? http://planetsmilies.net/confused-smiley-17515.gif -->http://planetsmilies.net/vicious-smiley-1815.gif
I am a journalist myself and I know all too-well what conduct is expected from the 'public forums' that are school newspapers.

I looked over the paper.

All in all, their special feature was fine, and perfectly within the bounds of good taste. In fact, if they made one major error, it was the first comic (on page 2). The reader comes upon that one without the clarifying frame - that this is a discussion of the N-word and not merely an instance of it. The framing of the feature itself first disarms the reader's natural reaction against the n-word. The page-2 comic comes without warning.

All in all, I still believe that this speech should have been absolutely protected by the school (and no, within a school setting, not all speech is free). I think I can understand a little bit better why a few of the admins initially freaked out, though. I'm glad the principal is back at work.

Actually, ummm, I didn't say I was going to call. In fact I didn't say I would take any action at all. I didn't say I was going to call any "idiots" and read them the riot act. No. I steered very clear of that.

So if that's how you tell yourself that what you are doing is okay by comparing yourself to someone who didn't say they were going to do something, I guess you are ahead on the chart. :rolleyes:

Odd...I called Teacher's Administrative Services (557-2222), and the phone rang. It was 10 till 7 in the morning, so no one answered, but I'll try again later, during regular business hours.

Here are a couple of other numbers that you can try.

OPS Public Information Services:
(402) 557-2070

General Administration:
(402) 557-2005

Superintendent's Office:
(402) 557-2001

Idiotsville?!?
Look...I know that this is just puny little Omaha, Nebraska here, but Idiotsville? That's a bit harsh, don'tcha think? Elitist much?

And think about it, Will. The school is not going to issue any type of statement to..."Will". Who the hell is "Will"? Some high end investigative reporter, that's going to twist every word uttered? Or, maybe just some freaky weirdo. Who knows? It's kind of cloak and dagger, at the best...and kind of just plain creepy, at the worst.

why in the hell would the cops be calling you, Will, unless you got stupid and threatened somebody?

Willravel: *reads articles* This is stupid, I should say something. I'll call.

Nay Sayers: It's okay to get mad, Will, but don't do anything about it. Sure, it's frustrating that they are stifling an interesting topic because they are probalby reactionary sheeple, and that reaction could have forced a good administrator out of her job...but we should only talk about it here in our community.

Willravel: Seriously? Is that really something you want to suggest? I hope I'm not the only one to have written his congressman about stopping the war or who donated to the victims of Katrina. Taking action is the best part of being a free thinking human being, and I think it's the responsibility of all smart people, like those found here on TFP, to take action when they feel things are bad, wrong, or could be better. If you don't take an active role in making the world a better place, then how do expect things to improve?

I don't think I've ever threatened anyone in my life. People who call into the school about a school newspaper article are bound to be reactionary, yes? So it stands to reason that they might say that 'someone suspicious' was calling the school, and it's also reasonable to assume that, because of the heat that was around this issue, the police may have given me a call. I don't want to be put on any lists for crap like that. I'm already on enough lists as it is.

Maybe I'm missing something, I dunno. But, I don't see where anybody said that, or anything even remotely like that.

You're missing the simple and obvious solution. Don't be suspicious.

And...why is anyone calling into the school regarding a school newspaper article bound to be reactionary? I don't get that at all.

I don't think that that is a reasonable assumption at all. That's the last thing that I would expect. Unless you threatened someone...and even then, I doubt that the Omaha Police Department is going to actively involve themselves with some "California whackjob". The worst that would happen is that they laugh at you after you hang up.

(Don't y'all know what this sounds like?)

It is so unbelievably foolish (IMO) that we have a first amendment that guarantees free speech, and we are at the same time trying to pass laws, er..."resolutions" that prohibit epitaphs like "nigger", "kike", "spic","wop",etc.

Even dumber is the fact that people are so uptight about it that we're expected to remove all similar sounding words from the English language, I mean, God forbid you should refer to a stingy fellow as "niggardly".

Pleeease. I want to run up to Rev. Al Sharpton with a box of Saltines and say, "What's in the friggin' box, Al??" and when he replies "crackers" then I want to haul him up in front of the media and hold him accountable for slurring me racially.

Yeah, OK, maybe I'm white and that has a little to do with my perspective- but then how exactly are you supposed to identify a race of people, or a person of a specific race?

Don't call them "colored" or you'll get the "Ain't nodody COLORED me, Honky!" or "African-American" "I'm not from AFRICA, FOOL!"
"Black" is the flavor of the week, but what about the poeple that are just kind of, like, brown?

Likewise don't call an Asian "Oriental". That was what they were called 20 years ago when I grew up and now it's a racial epitaph.

Now, I'm not so insenstive I would go around referring to somebody who was black as a "nigger", i.e. "I saw my neighbors the niggers at the grocery store"

but.... I think when we start outlawing words we are on a very slippery slope, and when we contextualize how the word may be used, all of the interpretations of that are not going to be in agreement.

I think we need to be tolerant of people calling us by any name they choose, I'm not keen on getting referred to as "Cracker" or "Whitey" and it won't make that person my friend, but I wouldn't think of litigating the usage of the term out of the language!?

How could anyone even consider this appropriate? Or, more to the point, LEGAL??

who is outlawing words? Highschool newspapers do not enjoy first amendment free speech protection, and nor should they. In the first place, the school is providing the space, computers, faculty adviser, printing facilities, and quite often the operating budget. Are you suggesting that after all they they should have NO say in what goes into the paper? In the second, if you give high school kids absolute freedom of speech you'll end up with a hate filled gossip rag that would make Larry Flint blush. Highschool is the time to guide them in how to express their views - and you can't do that if you have no control over the finished product.

You say what you think and you get what you get in response to it:
Everyone should have the same freedom of speech, followed by responses that "guide" it.
I'm an ornamental, niggardly fool of a cracker, or whatever.
Words are just words, and it's just us here.

OK...now we're starting to get back to the point. We have been...'conditioned' to abhore that word. To cringe at the very utterance of it. No word has ever carried such vile conotation in the English language. We...simply...do...not...say...it. We even have a cute little 'code word' for it. The "N" Word. We dare not say it. We dare not write it. We tread lightly just thinking it.

And yet...

There is a segment of society that uses it with complete and total impunity. They cannot be called out on it. It is part of their social vernacular. It is...identity.

Why?

That's all these kids were asking.

Might have something to do with 100's of years of institutionalized racism in the form of slavery, lynchings, jim crowe laws, segregation and outright hatred from the privileged in this country because of the skin color they were born with.

Asking why the word is offensive seems dense, it's offensive becuase it's meant to be. Using it as identity effectively strips the word of its power.

That said I do not believe the word should be censored, and I think the article in question is quite valid, but it strikes me as intellectually dishonest when people who should know better feign puzzlement over the power of this word. For Christ's sake, it's 2007 and we still have schools in this country that have segregated school dances. Sometimes I wonder if I live in the same reality as other people

"2CJESUS" appeared on a license plate in front of me the other day. It struck me as ...very odd. I know I'm prejudiced in one way or another; I think it's a function of the way we think, given what we've learned and accepted. Emphasizing the accepted, where can we go from there?
I'm believing commonality.