The Spectacle Blog
What happens when you speak the unfortunate truth about one of the greatest scams in academia? Ask Naomi Schaefer Riley, a veteran journalist and author who has been an editor at the Wall Street Journal, among many other accomplishments. For the past year, Riley has been a contributor to the Chronicle of Higher Education’s “Brainstorm” blog. It was a minor duty for which she was paid a “nominal amount” to blog twice a week, Riley told me in a brief phone interview this morning.
There hadn’t been any complaints about Riley’s contributions to Brainstorm until last week, when she wrote a post critical of university “black studies” programs, in response to a feature article the Chronicle had published on the subject. There had been “not much of a critical voice” in the Chronicle feature, Riley says, and she accurately described several doctoral dissertations by these putative scholars as “a collection of left-wing victimization claptrap.” In reaction to Riley’s criticism, liberals “flipped out” and “lost their ever-living minds,” as Riley’s friend Mollie Hemingway says.
Her editor at the Chronicle “asked me to respond to the criticisms,” Riley told me. Evidently her response provoked even greater outrage and, Riley says, she got a call from an editor Monday informing her that her contributions to the Chronicle were “no longer welcome.” In an editor’s note, Liz McMillen informed readers of the Chronicle that Riley’s contributions “did not conform to the journalistic standards and civil tone that you expect from us.” Washington Free Beacon managing editor Sonny Bunch remarked on Twitter: “The liberal mob has spoken. The expiation has occurred. The new gods of diversity are satisfied. The sun will rise tomorrow.”
What have we learned from this incident? “The ivory tower is an inflated bubble and they don’t take criticism very well,” Riley told me.
Expect to hear much more from Naomi Schaefer Riley in the near future. The academic “progressives” will not have the last word on this subject.
View all comments (41) | Leave a comment
Related Blog Posts
More Blog Posts by Robert Stacy McCain
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/05/08/chronicle-editors-pander-to-ac
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Andrew Keirns| 5.8.12 @ 1:39PM
Way to go, Naomi Schaefer Riley -- I read some of the comments to her post: pathetic.
Andrew Keirns| 5.8.12 @ 1:44PM
Front of the Class, Naomi -- she puts a big fat finger in the eye of the black studies people who don't see any reason to study these very relevant problems: high incarceration rates of blacks, low graduation rates of blacks, and high out-of-wedlock birth rates for blacks.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 2:22PM
"What happens when you speak the unfortunate truth about one of the greatest scams in academia?"
What happens when you publish a piece that judges doctoral dissertations on their titles alone to suit a clear predetermiend agenda? You get fired.
Vern Crisler| 5.8.12 @ 3:06PM
One doesn't really need to read them, inasmuch as one already knows what they are going to say. Just read the Democrat party platform and you've read them all.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 3:09PM
"One doesn't really need to read them"
If one wishes to be respected as an acedemic, one does.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 3:10PM
*academic
Calvin| 5.8.12 @ 4:12PM
You can try to sell that crap but it just makes you look foolish. We need more Rileys drawing attention to the stupidity that resides so overwhelmingly in our schools of higher education. Maybe we should get a second opinion from Pocahontas Warren.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 4:22PM
"You can try to sell that crap but it just makes you look foolish. We need more Rileys drawing attention to the stupidity that resides so overwhelmingly in our schools of higher education"
The only stupidity Riley drew attention to was her own for judging dissertations on their titles. I refuse to believe you don't understand how dumb that is.
Calvin| 5.8.12 @ 4:41PM
Feel free to read as much of that crap as you like. Read every silly word. Just don't try to impress anyone with your worthless credentials. You have made a mockery out of the university and you believe you can bs your way out of that. I can't believe you don't undertstand that.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 5.8.12 @ 5:57PM
"suit a clear predetermiend agenda"
You missed this one.
Butch| 5.8.12 @ 6:18PM
*predetermined
Vern Crisler| 5.8.12 @ 3:15PM
What a hoot! As if I cared about being respected as an "academic"--probably the most conformist and cowardly people on the earth. Remember Heidegger....
WVinMN| 5.8.12 @ 3:12PM
Sorry chump, those titles are a dead give away. I wouldn't waste my valuable time reading through that BS either. But, it does appear that Ms. Riley did indeed examine a few of the "dissertations" in some detail. Like this one...
"According to the Chronicle, “Ms. Levy is interested in examining the long tradition of black Republicanism, especially the rightward ideological shift it took in the 1980s after the election of Ronald Reagan. Ms. Levy’s dissertation argues that conservatives like Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, John McWhorter, and others have ‘played one of the most-significant roles in the assault on the civil-rights legacy that benefited them.’”"
Again, a normal, rational person doesn't need to read any further to conclude that such a thesis amounts to a big pile of hate-laced garbage. Furthermore, to think that these ignorant clowns will have been awarded the mark of academic achievement bestowed upon others who actually were held to scientific rigor in defending their respective projects (think biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics) makes me ill! I shouldn't be surprised, having spent a large part of my life in academia. But, it is still very disappointing that practically every university wastes precious time, money and effort on such programs. Programs that do nothing more that produce silver-tongued race-baiting fools intent on destroying this nation from within.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 4:06PM
"Sorry chump, those titles are a dead give away. I wouldn't waste my valuable time reading through that BS either. "
Then you shouldn't expect to carry a job writing for an academic paper. Ms. Riley no longer does.
John W.| 5.8.12 @ 4:14PM
Missed the part where he qualified his opinion to "a normal, rational person," did you?
Bob S| 5.9.12 @ 5:07AM
Doctoral dissertations are judged on their titles alone all the time. The only people that read that are the committee charged with actually approving a PhD and the people interested enough in the title to learn more. Ask any college professor, especially in physics, where so many papers are published daily, on top of doctoral dissertations, that you have to pick through them based on title first, then skimming the abstract to decide if it's interesting, and finally skimming the paper if they decide it's worth their time.
Red Phillips | 5.9.12 @ 1:21PM
I'm dealling with this objection on another blog. Give me a break Not Likely. (It's Not Likely that you're not a PC grandstander.) Riley's post was obviously polemic and the point was the titles of the dissertations because they illustrate the obvious derivative and ax grinding nature of the discipline. She was canned because she wrote wrongthink and the issue with her not reading the dissertations (please) is feigned outrage to cover for an obvious PC purging.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 2:24PM
Seriously, only a fool would defend her piece. Stop engaging in mindless tribalism.
Vern Crisler| 5.8.12 @ 3:10PM
She was only stating what we all know: that all these ethnic (and feminist) studies departments are a joke. Getting a degree in these fields is about as useful as a degree in Richard Simmons studies.
Seerak| 5.8.12 @ 3:35PM
"Mindless tribalism"? Did you really write that? There's nothing left wing about this post, other than your comments.
As for "only a fool", I suggest you familiarize yourself with the meaning of ad hominem. (though I'll bet you already know what that means quite well, from experience in its usage). Perhaps that sort of thing goes over well in your little bubble, but not out here.
You've got nothing.
Vern Crisler| 5.8.12 @ 2:26PM
Unfortunately, most dissertations are worthless and unreadable and unread, so Ms. Riley was being redundant in singling out black studies products. What a sinful person....
Richard Baker| 5.8.12 @ 2:47PM
God forbid that academia submit itself to scrutiny. Heaven forbid. The thought that academics are criticized just distresses them so. Good.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 2:51PM
"God forbid that academia submit itself to scrutiny."
The scrutiny of judging papers based on their titles and then making an assumption about an entire field of study based on those judgements?
That's not scrutiny, it's foolishness.
Fred17| 5.8.12 @ 4:09PM
Not Likely: Did you even read Riley's piece. She clearly read dissertation material on which she comments. You don't need to agree with her - even though YOU haven't read anything. But stop defending something you know nothing about.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 4:23PM
"Not Likely: Did you even read Riley's piece. She clearly read dissertation material on which she comments."
She said herself she didn't read the dissertations. She made a judgement about an entire field of study based on, essentially, judging a book by its cover. I will repeat again: only a fool would defend her piece. Don't just latch on to your "team," think about what you are defending.
Calvin| 5.8.12 @ 5:02PM
"...field of study..."
That is rich. You are selling this useless dribble to the wrong folks. It is interesting that your fascist instincts still require a little rationalizing. We get you. You don't need to hide yourself.
Not Likely| 5.8.12 @ 6:49PM
Your comment contains literally zero sense or point.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 5.8.12 @ 11:01PM
“I will repeat again: only a fool would defend her piece.”
I generally try to avoid over broad absolutes such as those that would require the word “only”, even without repetition. As of this writing (near 10:30 p.m. EDT), 9 of 32 comments on this thread are yours as “Not Likely” (and perhaps one more as “Butch”).
I read the “offending” blog post by Ms. Riley. While anyone is free to agree or disagree with any or all of its points, it is a blog post. There are multiple blog posts here each day. Some are inane, some insightful. Many I disagree with, though I don’t try to have Reid Smith lose his job because I disagree with his thoughts on Iran, or am offended by his improper or pejorative use of the term “neocon”. I can choose to read, comment or ignore as I see fit, as can all others, and the market sorts itself out.
You, on the other hand, seem to wish to dictate what can be said on this thread. As many others have posted throughout this thread, that is not likely to work here. We are not grad students easily cowed with the thought of a bad grade from a bullying teaching assistant. I may, of course, be misjudging you based on this limited interaction, but this is the impression you have created with me.
I feel the need for a bit of a correction, though. Nowhere in the post or Ms. Riley’s response did I see where it stated she only read the titles of the dissertations. I did see this:
“it is not my job to read entire dissertations before I write a 500-word piece about them”
It appears that this phrase is what you might have been referring to when you wrote “She said herself she didn't read the dissertations. She made a judgement about an entire field of study based on, essentially, judging a book by its cover.”
Now, maybe I am hyperfocused on details, but the elimination of the word “entire” from what she wrote makes its meaning somewhat different from what you wrote. If you don’t think that clever editing can remove context, I think there is a now unemployed former NBC news producer in Florida you might need to speak with.
Of course, maybe it was Ms. Riley’s “snark” that was disturbing, as I am sure we can agree that incivility has no place on a blog. Here are a couple of example of you taking the high road:
“The only stupidity Riley drew attention to was her own for judging dissertations on their titles.”
“Seriously, only a fool would defend her piece. Stop engaging in mindless tribalism.”
“That's not scrutiny, it's foolishness.”
“Your comment contains literally zero sense or point.”
True academics need to have thick skins to defend their ideas in a true academy. If Ms. Riley’s remarks offend you, I would recommend that you stay away from this site, as even some of the leftist trolls around here make a more compelling argument than you made over the four and a half hours you hung around this thread today.
Seerak| 5.8.12 @ 3:42PM
The comments to Riley's original CHE post are positively dripping with racism. I am of course referring to the Leftists attacking her.
I need to capture them, there is so much ammunition there against the remaining few who still think the Left is "anti-racist".
DRed| 5.8.12 @ 3:50PM
The Most Persuasive Case for Eliminating Black Studies? Just Read the Dissertations.
. . .
Finally, since this is a blog about academia and not journalism, I’ll forgive the commenters for not understanding that it is not my job to read entire dissertations before I write a 500-word piece about them.
And that, folks, is how to get fired.
Dit_ca| 5.8.12 @ 4:11PM
Naomi Schaefer Riley was paid to blog twice a week? Let's put aside the whole black-studies kerfuffle for a moment. If Riley truly told you the above, her overall credibility is to be questioned as well as her work ethic. There are no posts at all between Feb. 3 and April 7. Another factchecking problem. Did Riley tell you that there had never been complaints about her before as you state? Or was that your obviously unverified assumption? Even the quickest perusal of comments on her body of posts reveals quite a bit of criticism of her views. She was already one of the most criticized bloggers at the Chronicle. I don't think Riley should have been fired. But it seems her journalistic laziness is contagious Mr. McCain.
Spamf Roming| 5.8.12 @ 4:15PM
Another trillion dollars of taxes down the drain on useless "education for its own sake," or more accurately, leftist indoctrination. And woe to anybody who objects to the massive fraud. What kind of people are we generating in this degree mill? Einsteins? Edisons? Bells? No, just an angry mob of scapegoaters, eternally whining about how they are perpetual victims of a faceless villain, and they can never advance without further empowering the state and mercilessly silencing their critics.
What are you going to do with your degree? Aside from teach it to the next wave of Marxist majors? Nothing.
Schools that allow people to graduate (and accumulate MASSIVE, crippling student debt) without preparing them to earn a living and to contribute to society are guilty of egregious fraud, and they are bankrupting the nation both fiscally and intellectually.
What we are seeing now is the anger of a hive exposed.
But exposed it is.
BarryD| 5.8.12 @ 4:40PM
I'm usually not such a geek, but I can't help thinking of a Star Wars quote, here, regarding Riley...
"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine."
If Riley is wrong, wouldn't the Chronicle and its readers be better off giving her enough rope to hang herself with? Suppressing speech merely lends it more default credibility in the minds of most people who weren't born yesterday.
Maybe they think she's right. That's the most plausible explanation for why they'd want to shut her up.
FeFe| 5.8.12 @ 6:44PM
"Oh, suddenly throwing a giraffe into a volcano to make water is crazy? Hurry up before we come to our senses!"
Be still my heart. Might I prevail upon you for an introduction to Mr. Bunch?
FastJohnny| 5.8.12 @ 9:27PM
Well, Naomi is better off. I used to go to the Chronicle to read about Higher Ed and sometimes it would have interesting things about academia and how to get a job, etc.... But wooe betide the comment poster who might bring up something that could be construed as conservative. The readers there for the most part are extreme left and I have noticed the writers tend to like preaching to the choir. If you dare ask a simple question about a pertinant issue that might seem like you are coming from a conservative viewpoint, there is the inevitable fussilade of brown shirts invocations, nasty personal attacks on mere typos and a general intolerance of anything that isn't all loving and embracing of diversity studies.
Those people worship the holy trinity plus one: race, gender, ethnicity and labor. Any subject matter that isn't complimentary to their agenda is either ostracized or attacked with personal attacks. So much for liberal tolerance.
teapartydoc| 5.8.12 @ 10:45PM
Solution to student loan crisis: Go get the money where it was wasted. University foundations and endowments.
Bob S| 5.9.12 @ 4:57AM
Yes, the truth definitely does not conform to today's journalism standards.
Jobu| 5.9.12 @ 12:57PM
One of the dissertations she didn't deign to read before slamming it had to do with the historic impact of the promotion of single family housing policies on the African American community. Anyone who arrogantly dismisses the historical importance of housing policies, land use, zoning, etc, on urban communities isn't qualified to write for a middle school newsletter, must less a chronicle of higher education.
Red Phillips | 5.9.12 @ 4:20PM
I find it rich that Robert Stacy McCain is criticizing the PC thought police when he has been guilty of the same behavior ever since Charles Johnson put the scare in him. Stacy, meet kettle.