• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

White news anchor uses n-word, gets fired, black anchors does same is spared, sues

Status
Not open for further replies.

Izuna

Banned
lol, the responses in this thread...

y'all ignorant as hell

Thank you for your insight on how you feel about the responses on this thread.

Which responses at least, even if we shouldn't know why?

It wasn't just that the contract wasn't renewed. He was visibly held off air while his contract ran out.

According to the judge's own words, he was going to be reinstated to his position, except for his co-worker's continued insistence that he be let go.

Unless it is a breach of such contract this is something they can do can they not?

I mean really, they have grounds for firing him, his lawsuit explicitly seems to complain about "but he/she did it too and they weren't fired for it" tone.
 

vypek

Member
Cases like what you mentioned is a terrible comparison, but brining it back to a land of relevancy, it would be a separate lawsuit he would have to sue them with.

One I very much doubt he would be able to win.

Massive boohoo to him and I'm sure his career was fucked up by it, hypocritical or not I don't see how his work place broke the law not wanting to write him another contract if they didn't like him working there because he was saying nigga.

Ah, you already changed your post. Don't look directly at the case but rather the concept for comparison. A person in a professional setting has their past follow them and affect them (even though they may be a capable person in their field).

Yeah, in my previous post I mentioned to someone else that I thought it would be in a different lawsuit but I'm not too sure. And I don't think FOX will lose the the suit either. I've mentioned in other posts that his contract expiring seemed like it would be the only necessary defense.

It wasn't just that the contract wasn't renewed. He was visibly held off air while his contract ran out.

According to the judge's own words, he was going to be reinstated to his position, except for his co-worker's continued insistence that he be let go.

I'm not sure why it would ruin his career but it seems plausible enough. Could Fox not hold him off air even on a whim? Fox could have re-instated him even after insistence from the co-workers. If Fox chose to leave him off air due to complaints from coworkers, that might be something but I'm not sure if that is illegal either. I don't know enough about lawsuits or contracts to be sure of anything in this. Just all my speculation.
 

Syriel

Member
Massive boohoo to him and I'm sure his career was fucked up by it, hypocritical or not I don't see how his work place broke the law not wanting to write him another contract if they didn't like him working there because he was saying nigga.

If he can show that he was terminated for something and another employee wasn't terminated for the same thing, that would be an equal employment violation.

In that case, his work place would have broken the law.
 
I don't get it. It seems like an appropriate and important question to ask considering the scenario. If the guy is going to be doing a news story that deals directly with the word, then it would make sense to ask what the proper protocol is for dealing with the word while on air. I assume in this situation that the guy knows that the station (or all stations in general) doesn't normally allow the use of the word on air but have likely never done a story that deals so directly and centrally with the word. The whole point is how this group was having a funeral for this specific word.

This just makes it seem like there is no justification for any non-black ever using the word which is ridiculous. The news/media, teachers, writers, artists regardless of their race should all be able to use the word when documenting, teaching, bringing awareness to issues, etc. Context is important.

Now if the guy was just making a quip well then he's an asshole. But I didn't get that impression at all from what I read. The guy tried to make amends immediately and went to sensitivity class where he was given the all-clear.

Edit: As always, I'm open to being wrong.
 

DOWN

Banned
I don't entirely understand the context of his question when he used the word, but his phrasing could certainly have been more careful. The "finally" especially.
 

Izuna

Banned
Ah, you already changed your post. Don't look directly at the case but rather the concept for comparison. A person in a professional setting has their past follow them and affect them (even though they may be a capable person in their field).

Yeah, in my previous post I mentioned to someone else that I thought it would be in a different lawsuit but I'm not too sure. And I don't think FOX will lose the the suit either. I've mentioned in other posts that his contract expiring seemed like it would be the only necessary defense.

I misread who I was replying to and assumed you made different posts on that page, you must have been like "wtf" reading it the first time haha.

For me, if I could be the deciding outcome, I would like to know the actual damage and the full story, neither of which I would even get a hint off. If he has a strong case he needs to use it. There doesn't seem to be anything inherently illegal or immoral with his termination despite his claims. I say that as someone who has never read law however.

If he can show that he was terminated for something and another employee wasn't terminated for the same thing, that would be an equal employment violation.

In that case, his work place would have broken the law.

Well he can't go back in time but I think the lack of evidence he seems to have (and that we can read) will mean that the best he could do is have anyone else from the workplace help his case by saying others say the word too. Ultimately the company probably really wanted to fire him for personal reasons but they had this perfectly sound reason to go with. It's hard for me to sympathise with his silly gesture, I doubt anyone will, so this will all come down go here-say facts.
 
If he can show that he was terminated for something and another employee wasn't terminated for the same thing, that would be an equal employment violation.

In that case, his work place would have broken the law.

and of course the only witness to the other employee is ... him!
 

wildfire

Banned
I don't get it. It seems like an appropriate and important question to ask considering the scenario. If the guy is going to be doing a news story that deals directly with the word, then it would make sense to ask what the proper protocol is for dealing with the word while on air. I assume in this situation that the guy knows that the station (or all stations in general) doesn't normally allow the use of the word on air but have likely never done a story that deals so directly and centrally with the word. The whole point is how this group was having a funeral for this specific word.

This just makes it seem like there is no justification for any non-black ever using the word which is ridiculous. The news/media, teachers, writers, artists regardless of their race should all be able to use the word when documenting, teaching, bringing awareness to issues, etc. Context is important.

Now if the guy was just making a quip well then he's an asshole. But I didn't get that impression at all from what I read. The guy tried to make amends immediately and went to sensitivity class where he was given the all-clear.

I would think in most cases people are forced to take sensitivity classes.

Let's move past that. Just think about the scenario you are talking about. In what world is it ok for a news show to say on air fuck or shit?

Now extend that logic to the n-word. The guy was in his 40s when he asked that question working in an industry for 19 years at that point. He's experienced enough to know that foul language creates more headaches than is worth dealing with and that when the news is being discussed that word will be censored regardless of the intent behind the burial speech.
 

Syriel

Member
Well he can't go back in time but I think the lack of evidence he seems to have (and that we can read) will mean that the best he could do is have anyone else from the workplace help his case by saying others say the word too. Ultimately the company probably really wanted to fire him for personal reasons but they had this perfectly sound reason to go with. It's hard for me to sympathise with his silly gesture, I doubt anyone will, so this will all come down go here-say facts.

The judge specifically mentions emails from another coworker which use the same word when describing the situation to HR (the same way he did). That's not just hearsay. That's written evidence.

and of course the only witness to the other employee is ... him!

Only if you ignore the email cited by the judge.
 

vypek

Member
I misread who I was replying to and assumed you made different posts on that page, you must have been like "wtf" reading it the first time haha.

For me, if I could be the deciding outcome, I would like to know the actual damage and the full story, neither of which I would even get a hint off. If he has a strong case he needs to use it. There doesn't seem to be anything inherently illegal or immoral with his termination despite his claims. I say that as someone who has never read law however.
Lol, yeah I was pretty confused at first when I went to reply to the first post.

I'm actually really curious about the damage as well. I expect some news stations somewhere would hire him. To what extent is his career damaged? Are people not even giving him a chance to interview (because they know of this incident)? There is a lot more I want to know and I'd also like to know the outcome. Surely, there is more to the story than what we have read. I agree with you that it doesn't seem like there is something illegal here regarding the termination (or lack of renewal on the contract). And I also don't know much law. :)
 

Izuna

Banned
The judge specifically mentions emails from another coworker which use the same word when describing the situation to HR (the same way he did). That's not just hearsay. That's written evidence.

As opposed to typing "n-word"?

They were explaining what he said to HR, how else would they go about it? I am sure that he's claiming it was spoken in the workplace, because you stupid would it be to repeat someone's language to HR, complaining about it, making one get fired.

It says so clearly he was brought into a meeting where he continued to say it to make a point. I am guessing he was winding them up and the meeting was a chance to state that he wouldn't say it again.
 
Even as a joke, it's in poor taste and not acceptable for the work environment. As for why the double standard, well maybe it's unfair but as Chris Rock said,"There ain't a white man in this room that would change places with me. None of you. None of you would change places with me, and I'm rich! That's how good it is to be white!" Please don't complain about what's unfair.
 
As opposed to typing "n-word"?

They were explaining what he said to HR, how else would they go about it? I am sure that he's claiming it was spoken in the workplace, because you stupid would it be to repeat someone's language to HR, complaining about it, making one get fired.

It says so clearly he was brought into a meeting where he continued to say it to make a point. I am guessing he was winding them up and the meeting was a chance to state that he wouldn't say it again.

Does everyone get a pass if the word is written out? There's plenty of instances of that in this thread and it seems to be okay. The person sending emails at the workplace with the word didn't get it trouble.

I can't help but imagine this meeting being exactly like that hilarious Boondocks clip, with people cringing and shouting, "Stop saying the word!"
 

Izuna

Banned
Does everyone get a pass if the word is written out? There's plenty of instances of that in this thread and it seems to be okay. The person sending emails at the workplace with the word didn't get it trouble.

Eh I dunno. I don't believe sending an email to HR saying "he said %$^%" is the same as saying it aloud openly.

I mean it's definitely a slur that even when socially acceptable by others, it is similar to saying "bitch" "fuck" or what have you, and I think that regardless of whether or not the word is considered racist by the employer, it's not acceptable language in the workplace.

So it wouldn't be simple to say that if one finds it okay to spell the word out, it's the same as somehow refusing to stop saying the word when told not to. Even more so like the clip the Boondocks video is referencing.
 
"Does this mean we can finally say nigger/cracker/spick/gook/paki/chink lololol."

These words are one in the same. Maybe not in historical use or suffering caused during their use, but theyre all made up for the same reason. To refer to a certain people in a negative fashion.

Put them all together as a group instead of separating them and you have to wonder whyba person would ever want to "finally" be able to say them.
 

Mohonky

Member
"Does this mean we can finally say nigger/cracker/spick/gook/paki/chink lololol."

These words are one in the same. Maybe not in historical use or suffering caused during their use, but theyre all made up for the same reason. To refer to a certain people in a negative fashion.

Put them all together as a group instead of separating them and you have to wonder whyba person would ever want to "finally" be able to say them.

Past discussion on the 'weight' of racial terms I viewed on this board left with the impression that that wasn't the case. The n-word was deemed more offensive than any other term while anyone who felt cracker was an insult basically got shouted down.

As to spick, gook etc, they didnt get a mention, probably because they dont rate as offensively.

The n-word is like the racial trump card.
 
Personally I think if the word is used in a non offensive context then there's no problem with anybody using it. Frankly I find news reporters say the 'N word' pretty ridiculous. But in this case it seems it was used jokeingly which is totally not ok.
 

Two Words

Member
Saying "nigger" in a clinical manner should not get you fired when you're reporting on the very word. It's just irrational to act as if it is a wrongful act. I never liked the "White people can't never ever ever use that word in any context at all because they will never ever be able to understand how hateful that word is and how it makes black people feel" argument. It makes the assumption that a white person is incapable of understanding something that isn't entirely difficult to understand. It's not as if racial slurs are the only way people are ever made to feel subhuman. So if he truly used the word in such a clinical manner, he should win his case. Otherwise we might as well act like the word is "Voldemort" or something.
 

Metroxed

Member
No, not at all. Without going into it (because the appropriation of nigger/nigga literally has volumes written on it), I think it's something that white people (or really, non-black people) shouldn't say. How the black community wants to use it? Leave that up to them. White people just need to move along.

Race-exclusive words?

America, you're a weird place.
 

SkyOdin

Member
Race-exclusive words?

America, you're a weird place.

It is hardly a strange concept. All language is extremely context-sensative. There is a very big difference between someone using a word to describe their own identity, versus someone else using words to assign an identity to someone else. There is a huge difference between using certain words among peers versus directing words against complete strangers.

There isn't even a monolithic English language in the United States. The entire country is a mass of different dialects and registers. Different people in different social classes speak as distinct branches of the English language as the difference between British and Australian English. So why should we treat the words they are using as having the same inherent meaning as if there isn't such huge variation in language in this country?

There are all sorts of words that have certain meanings in some places, and different meanings in other places. The source of that difference is context. Sometimes the source of that different context is geography, and sometimes it is race.

So I don't agree at all that the idea of race-specific words is somehow weird.
 

Metroxed

Member
Why is it so weird? There are lots of words that are exclusive for a variety of reasons. Why is race a special case where that can't be true as well?

It is weird because it shows how obsessed Americans are with race and racial issues, at least in comparison to other developed countries. Just see how the article mentions everyone's race.

About saying or not this particular word, I'd say it should entirely depend on the intention someone has when saying it, and not by the race of the interlocutor. If the word is being used "clinically" (with no intention to cause harm or offence), I can't see why there should be an issue with it, no matter who says it. If the word is deemed to be always offensive, then no one should be able get away with saying it, not even black people.

There are lots of words that are exclusive (or better suited) to certain scenarios,but hardly any of them have anything to do with race.

That's why I think it's ridiculous. This plus the "cultural appropiation" thing, when apparently you cannot celebrate aspects that are not part of your culture. That's really US-exclusive I think, and I believe it is also ridiculous.
 

Metroxed

Member
Did you confuse "cultural appropriation" with "cultural appreciation"?

Just giving you an out, here.

No, I didn't. I don't mean celebrating as an observer but as actively taking part and living the culture as if it were your own. As long as you are respectful, there shouldn't be an issue with it.
 
First of all, he was not fired. His contract wasn't renewed. There's a big difference. They probably felt his presence was gonna make the other black employees uncomfortable, whether they use the word or not.

He had more than ample time to find another job. This situation didn't ruin his career because him applying for new jobs, they won't know why he left his previous.

He was given 7 months pay. Which he gladly took. He had 7 months to find a new gig.

I think its more damaging to his career that the story actually came out.
 

jacksnap

Neo Member
No, I didn't. I don't mean celebrating as an observer but as actively taking part and living the culture as if it were your own. As long as you are respectful, there shouldn't be an issue with it.

I think taking part of and living the culture is admirable, certainly.

People usually take issue with and call actions "cultural appropriation" when it isn't respectful. Is that still ridiculous in your opinion?
 

Alienous

Member
The point is lost if the issue is the sequence of syllables said aloud and not the intent.

There are absolutely contexts where saying the word makes sense. It isn't Voldemort, for fucks sakes.

In this case, however, the irony of the firing is somewhat enjoyable.
 

Nephtis

Member
First of all, he was not fired. His contract wasn't renewed. There's a big difference. They probably felt his presence was gonna make the other black employees uncomfortable, whether they use the word or not.

He had more than ample time to find another job. This situation didn't ruin his career because him applying for new jobs, they won't know why he left his previous.

He was given 7 months pay. Which he gladly took. He had 7 months to find a new gig.

I think its more damaging to his career that the story actually came out.

What? no.

Not being able to work and just letting the contract run out is pretty much getting fired. As ridiculous as i think this whole thing was though, it's the network's decision if they wanted to keep him or not. They chose not to, which is ok.

He didn't "gladly" take the money. The thing is, not only did they give him hell for that mistake (and come on, it's not like it was said on air), it would seem someone went out of their way to let other outlets know of this, probably while it was still in process. They blackballed him; no network is gonna want a guy carrying this much baggage. Reputation means a lot in that industry, especially if you're going to be the person publicly representing them.

It's kind of hard to damage your career further when you have no career left.
 

GreedZen

Banned
Race-exclusive words?

America, you're a weird place.


I can hear that.

Many "Not really African" Americans seem to feel they can say whatever they want in regards to those who don't have enough negro in em. Why, because the history of nigger out weighs any other slur. Thus giving them the right to spit cracker here, kike there and so on. You know, because apparently since they're black they can't be racist, bigoted and all those other words thrown about in these conversations.

Based on what I've read, I'm hoping this guy gets some money.
 
I can hear that.

Many "Not really African" Americans seem to feel they can say whatever they want in regards to those who don't have enough negro in em. Why, because the history of nigger out weighs any other slur. Thus giving them the right to spit cracker here, kike there and so on. You know, because apparently since they're black they can't be racist, bigoted and all those other words thrown about in these conversations.

Based on what I've read, I'm hoping this guy gets some money.

Your rant is talking about something totally different to the person you quoted.

He's saying he thinks black people saying the n word being less of an issue than white people saying it is weird.

You're just ranting about some black people being racist like its okay, but nobody would say its okay. If the black anchor said "can we finally say cracker now when talking about white people", I'm sure hed have had his ass kicked too......

And somehow linking that as a reason to why the dude should win the case o_o.

Sounds like you were getting something off your chest more than you were making a valid point in the debate.
 

Timedog

good credit (by proxy)
If all the people that get upset over not being able to use a word felt as strongly about ending actually harmful systemic racism, I dont think this would even be an issue. By getting very upset about an issue like this, you betray a lack of understanding of history and its implications on modern society, a lack empathy, and a lack of respect.

The average black person looks around and says: "I live in poverty, the vast vast majority of other people I see that look like me do too. Our schools are way underfunded, we are locked up based on skin color, the ones that manage to rise to the top and get an education still have a much harder time finding jobs, getting loans, housing and are still profiled looked down upon, and held to a much higher standard in order to be thought of as " normal". The magical negroes which pass testing are the anecdoctal examples that many whites use to tell themselves that they're not really racist, while ignoring everything else that might shakeup their worldview or disrupt privilege in any way. I see a populace who obviously doesn't give a fuck about us, which is overwhelmingly evident by simply walking out of my front door and looking around. And its been like that for as far back as my familial lineage can be traced. I don't need fancy arguments, I don't need the volumes upon volumes of statistics, I don't need an impassioned speech to tell me what reality is like. I walk out the front door and I can see how well regarded black people truly are. Its as plain as day."

Its entirely inappropriate to complain about how that person has extra privilege of being able to say a word that you cannot say. Like I said, it betrays a fundamental lack of empathy--which is really the crux of the problem. Try not to be part of the problem.
 

grumble

Member
This case seems like a pretty clear cut case of not racist. They were discussing a story that involved the ritual burial of a slur, in which it was said dozens of times, and he asked in a private meeting if journalists could use this word now? In the context of the story it seems fairly innocent. Even if it was a joke in that context it doesn't appear to be malicious.
 

Slayven

Member
If all the people that get upset over not being able to use a word felt as strongly about ending actually harmful systemic racism, I dont think this would even be an issue. By getting very upset about an issue like this, you betray a lack of understanding of history and its implications on modern society, a lack empathy, and a lack of respect.

The average black person looks around and says: "I live in poverty, the vast vast majority of other people I see that look like me do too. Our schools are way underfunded, we are locked up based on skin color, the ones that manage to rise to the top and get an education still have a much harder time finding jobs, getting loans, housing and are still profiled looked down upon, and held to a much higher standard in order to be thought of as " normal". The magical negroes which pass testing are the anecdoctal examples that many whites use to tell themselves that they're not really racist, while ignoring everything else that might shakeup their worldview or disrupt privilege in any way. I see a populace who obviously doesn't give a fuck about us, which is overwhelmingly evident by simply walking out of my front door and looking around. And its been like that for as far back as my familial lineage can be traced. I don't need fancy arguments, I don't need the volumes upon volumes of statistics, I don't need an impassioned speech to tell me what reality is like. I walk out the front door and I can see how well regarded black people truly are. Its as plain as day."

Its entirely inappropriate to complain about how that person has extra privilege of being able to say a word that you cannot say. Like I said, it betrays a fundamental lack of empathy--which is really the crux of the problem. Try not to be part of the problem.

Damn good post, but it will fly over so many heads
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
I would think in most cases people are forced to take sensitivity classes.

Let's move past that. Just think about the scenario you are talking about. In what world is it ok for a news show to say on air fuck or shit?

Now extend that logic to the n-word. The guy was in his 40s when he asked that question working in an industry for 19 years at that point. He's experienced enough to know that foul language creates more headaches than is worth dealing with and that when the news is being discussed that word will be censored regardless of the intent behind the burial speech.

Except it sounds like they were about to air an article about a funeral for the word which included the word being said many times over. So it does seem like the channel was willing to air the word. Which then makes it appropriate for team members to ask questions about how it'll be used.
 

wildfire

Banned
Except it sounds like they were about to air an article about a funeral for the word which included the word being said many times over. So it does seem like the channel was willing to air the word. Which then makes it appropriate for team members to ask questions about how it'll be used.

I would make a ban bet that they never would allow the word nigger to be said on air. This isn't cable.
 
Except it sounds like they were about to air an article about a funeral for the word which included the word being said many times over. So it does seem like the channel was willing to air the word. Which then makes it appropriate for team members to ask questions about how it'll be used.

It would probably have been bleeped out tbf
 
Unless he had actual racist feelings/behaviour outside of this, the coworkers are assholes and used this ''incident'' as a means to get the guy out, so one or more of them could move up the ladder. The news anchor business is a tough world and everything points to them ganging up on someone to further their own positions.
“Tom, you’re still saying the word; why are you doing that?” Ali responded,
ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS?!?!?!? Are there actually people who literally don't allow any and all use of the word nigger? Even when discussing the actual word itself or describing an incident for which they are being reprimanded?! What. The. Fuck.
Burlington said the company’s counselor told him she did not believe that he “had racial bias or related issues” and declared him fit to return to work.
This story is messed up and everyone who conspired to get him fired should be fired.
 
It is weird because it shows how obsessed Americans are with race and racial issues, at least in comparison to other developed countries. Just see how the article mentions everyone's race.

About saying or not this particular word, I'd say it should entirely depend on the intention someone has when saying it, and not by the race of the interlocutor. If the word is being used "clinically" (with no intention to cause harm or offence), I can't see why there should be an issue with it, no matter who says it. If the word is deemed to be always offensive, then no one should be able get away with saying it, not even black people.

There are lots of words that are exclusive (or better suited) to certain scenarios,but hardly any of them have anything to do with race.

That's why I think it's ridiculous. This plus the "cultural appropiation" thing, when apparently you cannot celebrate aspects that are not part of your culture. That's really US-exclusive I think, and I believe it is also ridiculous.

Dude, I tried explaining this to Anericans before and was branded a racist on this very board.

They don't understand. Like really don't understand.

He's lucky to be still walking with its own leg, because i would've beaten him like the little shit he is.

See?

Eh I dunno. I don't believe sending an email to HR saying "he said %$^%" is the same as saying it aloud openly.

Wat?

Seriously.
 
Eh I dunno. I don't believe sending an email to HR saying "he said %$^%" is the same as saying it aloud openly.
“Tom, you’re still saying the word; why are you doing that?” Ali responded, according to court papers. This brought the meeting to an immediate end, and Burlington was suspended.
The guy was suspended immediately for explaining what he had said to HR. Guess he should have written it on a piece of paper and handed it over. You can't defend this type of bullshit organization.
 

UrbanRats

Member
Yeah i can't infer the tone with which he used the word, but that "finally" makes him look really fucking bad.

As for why different people of different races/backgrounds can use different words with different repercussions, it's self explanatory.
Words are just words until you apply context to them, and that background *is* the context you're looking for. Again, it's pretty obvious.

I do find it stupid to circle around the word if it's meant to be used in a clinical and descriptive manner (this goes for any word) but again, this doesn't seem to be exactly the case here, as his initial quote seems to be more of an ironic (and inappropriate) jab.
 

Foggy

Member
The account is too confusing and muddled for me to get much of a handle on it. It's just too difficult to parse what is the anchor's account of what happened and what is accepted as what happened by all parties. I would hope that being conciliatory about what was said is enough to not have you blackballed, but who knows how genuine his attempts at apology even were. But judging by the initial question, yeah he sounds like a dickhead so it's hard for me to muster a lot of sympathy. Plus the basis for his lawsuit is just pathetic. I have no idea how it would hold up in a court, but it just shows he didn't learn a damn thing despite how apologetic he claims he was.

Well I believe that answers that man's question.

Pretty much.
 

Izuna

Banned
Wat?

Seriously.

From what I understand...

He said what he said. And someone complained to HR by saying "omg he said nigga" in an email, probably cc'ing him.

Then they call him in and he was like "so I said nigga, bla bla bla" and they are like, you know you can't say that... and he's like "they said it too, they say nigga, so why can't we say nigga?"

And from the article it mentions that they said "you're still saying it" or something and decided to fire him. Like that Boondocks video.

I don't see how firing him for that is the same as firing his colleague for saying it in that email. I really don't see it. I would personally give them both a serious warning to not type or say it, and if he was adamant in trying to explain his use of the word instead of shutting up about it, considering he has a history of racial insensitivity, it sounds within a sort of reason to put him in some sort of diciplinary line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom