Is It Time to Boycott the Chronicle? A Call to Attention and Solidarity Regarding The Positivistic Response to Naomi Schaefer Riley's Condemnation of Black Studies
This blog is a call to attention and solidarity.
Has anyone considered boycotting the Chronicle of Higher Education?
The Chronicle is feeding off of the sensationalizing effects of racially-tinged arguments. Their response is opportunistic and irresponsible. I reject the invitation to have a positivistic debate about the validity of Black Studies. The grounds for this position are multiple, including the hollow grounds of Schaefer Riley's original position, the dismissive nature of Schaefer Riley's reply, and the noncommittal response of the editorial staff of the Chronicle of Higher Education. There is bias present against the existence of Black Studies, and fields like it. The bias is institutionalized through blogs like Schaefer Riley's and through the deployment of positivistic arguments about debate used by the Chronicle's editorial staff. Given that the Chronicle is benefitting from our concern in terms of web traffic, I wonder whether the best response is not engagement, but rather the withdrawal of direct engagement with the Chronicle.
In an effort to call folks to action on this front, I have penned this blog about the controversy surrounding Naomi Schaefer Riley and the Chronicle of Higher Education. In short, the blog reviews the incident, blogosphere reactions to the incident, and its root cause. I contend that the root cause of this controversy is not the news article about the Black Studies conference or even Schaefer Riley's questionable opinions. Instead, the root cause is the highly-successful and well-organized summit of 11 Black Studies doctoral programs hosted by the African American Studies department of Northwestern University.
During the week of May Day, in the Chronicle of Higher Education blogosphere, there has been launched an attack mounted by Naomi Schaefer Riley questioning the very existence of Black Studies programs in educational institutions. Attention is worthy, for even the least technologically astute person. Politics and institutional processes combine to create a hostile field for people studying topics that have been historically marginalized. Solidarity is worthy, for every age, educational, and racial/ethnic group. The targets of the condescending and marginalizing consequences of the politics of Naomi Schaefer Riley and the institutional processes of the Chronicle of Higher Education are scholarly works that have not even been peer-reviewed yet. The ins and outs of the original attack, what prompted it, and the response of African American Studies scholars at Northwestern (whose graduate students were the foci of the attack) and others can be followed through the links below. For now, I will summarize some key points and questions.
Naomi Schaefer Riley condemned Black Studies to non-existence based off of her opinion of 3 dissertations in-progress from Northwestern's first cohort of doctoral students. She read descriptions of the dissertations in a journal article by Stacey Patton and summarized them as grounds for the entire field of Black Studies to be dismissed. Her argument amounts to scholarly abortion -- that is, killing dissertations before they are born (i.e., defended and filed with the university). Given the vehemence that the topic of abortion breeds in Americans, there is no wonder in my mind that petitions, emails, and blog comments have been so animated in response to Schaefer Riley. Meanwhile, the Chronicle of Higher Education, in responding to the concerns of upset readers, urged people to debate Riley's opinion about the validity and need for Black Studies discipline in the positivist tradition of diplomacy, reason, and even-keeled emotions.
The root cause of this blogosphere attack is a summit of doctoral programs operating within the Black Studies tradition. The summit, “A Beautiful Struggle: Transformative Black Studies in Shifting Political Landscapes,” was sponsored by Northwestern's African American Studies department in commemoration of their first cohort of doctoral students. The conference took place from April 12-14, 2012. It brought together scholars from the 11 universities currently offering doctoral programs in Black Studies and other interested scholars, including myself.
There is power in both our voices and in the energies necessitated by congregating together. Without the conference itself, there would be no place for such a response by Naomi Schaefer Riley. Few people would have ever known about the dissertations in-progress by Ruth Hays, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, and TaSha B. Levy. The Chronicle would never have had the opportunity to publish Stacey Patton's rendition of the conference proceedings. Instead, Naomi Schaefer Riley would have had to find some other target at which to aim her racial blind spots.
In sum, the cowardly condemnation that we are witnessing in this moment is an indirect consequence of our visionary ambitions to come together and celebrate our existence. These are ambitions that many of us have and many of us struggle to attain. The fact that our very existence and community life is being condemned is, in and of itself, a call for action.
People around the nation are speaking out against the actions and inactions of Naomi Schaefer Riley and the Chronicle of Higher Education. Where will your voice and energies be in this response?
Indiana, as an institution, only recently instituted our own Black Studies doctoral program and have yet to produce an inaugural cohort of scholars. What world will these Ph.D.s face when they complete their degrees? What world will any person who studies issues of race, ethnicity, and inequality face if the opinions of Naomi Schaefer Riley are treated as reasonable fodder for debate and critique? If the subject matter of subprime lending in the 1970s, natural birth, and conservative politics are silly topics for Black Studies Ph.D.s, then what about the matters of social attitudes, health, labor markets, education, family, and so forth?
How long before other interdisciplinary programs are called into question? What about the study of race, ethnicity, diversity, multiculturalism, racism, ethnocentrism, prejudice, discrimination, and inequality in mono-disciplines, like Sociology, History, Anthropology, English, Political Science, Public Health, Public Policy, Economics, Communication, Geography, Criminal Justice, Psychology, and so forth? Have not some citizens of our nation already started to ban the teaching of Latino and Chicana/o subject matters to pre-college youth? Are there not books geared toward popular audiences encouraging youth to avoid the topic of race, ethnicity, diversity, and racism in colloquial discussion?
Action may need to be reasoned and measured. Riley herself has followed up her original article with righteous indignation and redirected blame. The Chronicle of Higher Education has declined to get involved on either side. Still, the Twitter action by persons associated with the editorial staff indicates that the editors of the Chronicle have a non-ignorable opinion on these matters. People should take action up to their comfort level. Nonetheless, action must be.
Again, I ask: Has anyone considered boycotting the Chronicle of Higher Education?
What would a boycott of the Chronicle of Higher Education include? The boycott can be on behalf of the individual or on behalf of a group or institution (e.g., a university, a department, an academic organization). The act of boycotting could take any number of forms, including:
* ceasing response to Naomi Schaefer Riley's Brainstorm blog at the Chronicle
* ceasing response to other Brainstorm blogs at the Chronicle
* ceasing response to the Chronicle's editorial staff
* suspending subscription to other services of the Chronicle, including -- but not limited to -- subscription to news articles and to job services
* signing a petition challenging the Chronicle of Higher Education's legitimization of the blogosphere attack of Black Studies (go here)
* drafting an open letter detailing the reasons for strategic non-response and direct withdrawal
Below, I am providing several links, so that one may follow the story how they see fit. They are not comprehensive, but instead reflect my own prejudices and blind spots on this issue.
Thank you for these moments.
LINKS TO NAOMI SCHAEFER RILEY BLOG
Naomi Schaefer Riley's original blog: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-most-persuasive-case-for-eliminating-black-studies-just-read-the-dissertations/46346
LINKS TO STIMULI OF NAOMI SCHAEFFER RILEY BLOG
Link to the original news article produced by Stacey Patton referenced by Naomi Schaeffer Riley: http://chronicle.com/article/Black-Studies-Swaggering/131533/
Link to announcement of summit of Black Studies doctoral program: http://www.afam.northwestern.edu/news/index.html
LINKS TO RESPONSES HOSTED ON THE CHRONICLE'S BLOGSITE
The response of Liz McMillen, editor of Chronicle of Higher Education, to emails from concerned citizens to moderate Schaefer Riley's blog: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/editors-note/46423
Northwestern Graduate Students named by Riley respond to original Riley article: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/grad-students-respond-to-riley-post-on-african-american-studies/46421
African American Studies Professors at Northwestern respond to original Riley article: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/faculty-respond-to-riley-post-on-african-american-studies/46436
Schaefer Riley's reply to concerned citizens: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/black-studies-part-2-a-response-to-critics/46401
LINKS TO RESPONSES HOSTED BY OTHER ONLINE VENUES
An early blog responding to the problematic behind Schaefer Riley's vitriolic response, which focuses on the inferiority of blackness as a subject of inquiry: http://tressiemc.com/2012/05/02/the-inferiority-of-blackness-as-a-subject/
Daily Kos blog identifying institutionalized racism as the culprit: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/04/1088743/-The-Debasement-of-the-Chronicle-of-Higher-Education
The Root on Vicious Blogger Attacks: http://www.theroot.com/buzz/black-studies-inferior-blogger-attacks
Eddie S. Glaude, Jr View -- This Is About Politics: http://www.theroot.com/views/black-studies-critic
Black Studies Hitpiece Leads to Twitter Trainwreck @ StudentActivism.net: http://studentactivism.net/2012/05/04/twitter-trainwreck/
Petition aimed at questioning CHE's legitimization of Schaefer Riley in her attack on Black Studies: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/challenge-the-chronicle-of-higher-education-to/
Has anyone considered boycotting the Chronicle of Higher Education?
The Chronicle is feeding off of the sensationalizing effects of racially-tinged arguments. Their response is opportunistic and irresponsible. I reject the invitation to have a positivistic debate about the validity of Black Studies. The grounds for this position are multiple, including the hollow grounds of Schaefer Riley's original position, the dismissive nature of Schaefer Riley's reply, and the noncommittal response of the editorial staff of the Chronicle of Higher Education. There is bias present against the existence of Black Studies, and fields like it. The bias is institutionalized through blogs like Schaefer Riley's and through the deployment of positivistic arguments about debate used by the Chronicle's editorial staff. Given that the Chronicle is benefitting from our concern in terms of web traffic, I wonder whether the best response is not engagement, but rather the withdrawal of direct engagement with the Chronicle.
In an effort to call folks to action on this front, I have penned this blog about the controversy surrounding Naomi Schaefer Riley and the Chronicle of Higher Education. In short, the blog reviews the incident, blogosphere reactions to the incident, and its root cause. I contend that the root cause of this controversy is not the news article about the Black Studies conference or even Schaefer Riley's questionable opinions. Instead, the root cause is the highly-successful and well-organized summit of 11 Black Studies doctoral programs hosted by the African American Studies department of Northwestern University.
During the week of May Day, in the Chronicle of Higher Education blogosphere, there has been launched an attack mounted by Naomi Schaefer Riley questioning the very existence of Black Studies programs in educational institutions. Attention is worthy, for even the least technologically astute person. Politics and institutional processes combine to create a hostile field for people studying topics that have been historically marginalized. Solidarity is worthy, for every age, educational, and racial/ethnic group. The targets of the condescending and marginalizing consequences of the politics of Naomi Schaefer Riley and the institutional processes of the Chronicle of Higher Education are scholarly works that have not even been peer-reviewed yet. The ins and outs of the original attack, what prompted it, and the response of African American Studies scholars at Northwestern (whose graduate students were the foci of the attack) and others can be followed through the links below. For now, I will summarize some key points and questions.
Naomi Schaefer Riley condemned Black Studies to non-existence based off of her opinion of 3 dissertations in-progress from Northwestern's first cohort of doctoral students. She read descriptions of the dissertations in a journal article by Stacey Patton and summarized them as grounds for the entire field of Black Studies to be dismissed. Her argument amounts to scholarly abortion -- that is, killing dissertations before they are born (i.e., defended and filed with the university). Given the vehemence that the topic of abortion breeds in Americans, there is no wonder in my mind that petitions, emails, and blog comments have been so animated in response to Schaefer Riley. Meanwhile, the Chronicle of Higher Education, in responding to the concerns of upset readers, urged people to debate Riley's opinion about the validity and need for Black Studies discipline in the positivist tradition of diplomacy, reason, and even-keeled emotions.
The root cause of this blogosphere attack is a summit of doctoral programs operating within the Black Studies tradition. The summit, “A Beautiful Struggle: Transformative Black Studies in Shifting Political Landscapes,” was sponsored by Northwestern's African American Studies department in commemoration of their first cohort of doctoral students. The conference took place from April 12-14, 2012. It brought together scholars from the 11 universities currently offering doctoral programs in Black Studies and other interested scholars, including myself.
There is power in both our voices and in the energies necessitated by congregating together. Without the conference itself, there would be no place for such a response by Naomi Schaefer Riley. Few people would have ever known about the dissertations in-progress by Ruth Hays, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, and TaSha B. Levy. The Chronicle would never have had the opportunity to publish Stacey Patton's rendition of the conference proceedings. Instead, Naomi Schaefer Riley would have had to find some other target at which to aim her racial blind spots.
In sum, the cowardly condemnation that we are witnessing in this moment is an indirect consequence of our visionary ambitions to come together and celebrate our existence. These are ambitions that many of us have and many of us struggle to attain. The fact that our very existence and community life is being condemned is, in and of itself, a call for action.
People around the nation are speaking out against the actions and inactions of Naomi Schaefer Riley and the Chronicle of Higher Education. Where will your voice and energies be in this response?
Indiana, as an institution, only recently instituted our own Black Studies doctoral program and have yet to produce an inaugural cohort of scholars. What world will these Ph.D.s face when they complete their degrees? What world will any person who studies issues of race, ethnicity, and inequality face if the opinions of Naomi Schaefer Riley are treated as reasonable fodder for debate and critique? If the subject matter of subprime lending in the 1970s, natural birth, and conservative politics are silly topics for Black Studies Ph.D.s, then what about the matters of social attitudes, health, labor markets, education, family, and so forth?
How long before other interdisciplinary programs are called into question? What about the study of race, ethnicity, diversity, multiculturalism, racism, ethnocentrism, prejudice, discrimination, and inequality in mono-disciplines, like Sociology, History, Anthropology, English, Political Science, Public Health, Public Policy, Economics, Communication, Geography, Criminal Justice, Psychology, and so forth? Have not some citizens of our nation already started to ban the teaching of Latino and Chicana/o subject matters to pre-college youth? Are there not books geared toward popular audiences encouraging youth to avoid the topic of race, ethnicity, diversity, and racism in colloquial discussion?
Action may need to be reasoned and measured. Riley herself has followed up her original article with righteous indignation and redirected blame. The Chronicle of Higher Education has declined to get involved on either side. Still, the Twitter action by persons associated with the editorial staff indicates that the editors of the Chronicle have a non-ignorable opinion on these matters. People should take action up to their comfort level. Nonetheless, action must be.
Again, I ask: Has anyone considered boycotting the Chronicle of Higher Education?
What would a boycott of the Chronicle of Higher Education include? The boycott can be on behalf of the individual or on behalf of a group or institution (e.g., a university, a department, an academic organization). The act of boycotting could take any number of forms, including:
* ceasing response to Naomi Schaefer Riley's Brainstorm blog at the Chronicle
* ceasing response to other Brainstorm blogs at the Chronicle
* ceasing response to the Chronicle's editorial staff
* suspending subscription to other services of the Chronicle, including -- but not limited to -- subscription to news articles and to job services
* signing a petition challenging the Chronicle of Higher Education's legitimization of the blogosphere attack of Black Studies (go here)
* drafting an open letter detailing the reasons for strategic non-response and direct withdrawal
Below, I am providing several links, so that one may follow the story how they see fit. They are not comprehensive, but instead reflect my own prejudices and blind spots on this issue.
Thank you for these moments.
LINKS TO NAOMI SCHAEFER RILEY BLOG
Naomi Schaefer Riley's original blog: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-most-persuasive-case-for-eliminating-black-studies-just-read-the-dissertations/46346
LINKS TO STIMULI OF NAOMI SCHAEFFER RILEY BLOG
Link to the original news article produced by Stacey Patton referenced by Naomi Schaeffer Riley: http://chronicle.com/article/Black-Studies-Swaggering/131533/
Link to announcement of summit of Black Studies doctoral program: http://www.afam.northwestern.edu/news/index.html
LINKS TO RESPONSES HOSTED ON THE CHRONICLE'S BLOGSITE
The response of Liz McMillen, editor of Chronicle of Higher Education, to emails from concerned citizens to moderate Schaefer Riley's blog: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/editors-note/46423
Northwestern Graduate Students named by Riley respond to original Riley article: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/grad-students-respond-to-riley-post-on-african-american-studies/46421
African American Studies Professors at Northwestern respond to original Riley article: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/faculty-respond-to-riley-post-on-african-american-studies/46436
Schaefer Riley's reply to concerned citizens: http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/black-studies-part-2-a-response-to-critics/46401
LINKS TO RESPONSES HOSTED BY OTHER ONLINE VENUES
An early blog responding to the problematic behind Schaefer Riley's vitriolic response, which focuses on the inferiority of blackness as a subject of inquiry: http://tressiemc.com/2012/05/02/the-inferiority-of-blackness-as-a-subject/
Daily Kos blog identifying institutionalized racism as the culprit: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/04/1088743/-The-Debasement-of-the-Chronicle-of-Higher-Education
The Root on Vicious Blogger Attacks: http://www.theroot.com/buzz/black-studies-inferior-blogger-attacks
Eddie S. Glaude, Jr View -- This Is About Politics: http://www.theroot.com/views/black-studies-critic
Black Studies Hitpiece Leads to Twitter Trainwreck @ StudentActivism.net: http://studentactivism.net/2012/05/04/twitter-trainwreck/
Petition aimed at questioning CHE's legitimization of Schaefer Riley in her attack on Black Studies: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/challenge-the-chronicle-of-higher-education-to/
Comments