<p>
</p>
<p>No such thing anymore with the advent of the internet. Anything published anywhere is now open for the entire world to see. Beware!!</p>
<p>
Absolutely. This is apparently their mindset…the prism through which everything else is filtered.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I feel funny about commenting on this since I don’t have a “dog in this fight”. I have to agree with you NJres, and I think that this is agenda driven. (I just saw berurah’s post, and she beat me to the quote) </p>
<p>I only have the word of a very dear friend whose only child, a daughter, is at Duke and who is black. The parents are very close to and protective of her. On top of that, last year she was a freshman at Duke living away from home for the first time. I talked to my friend last school year when this thing blew up with demonstrations, media attention and such. Her daughter had seen absolutely no incidents of racism, sexism or sexual violence. In fact, she was having the time of her life. Believe me, her parents would have been the first to get her out of any unsavory situation. Daughter was very much looking forward to getting back to school this fall, and since then I haven’t talked to my friend about this case. If something bad had come up, or if her daughter was experiencing problems, she would have told me. Of course, this is just one black female student’s experience, but she’s a very smart, assertive, and confident girl, and if she saw this going on around her she would have said and done something about it.</p>
<p>That was an excellent letter from the Cornell grad student…very well said…</p>
<p>Coronax, I don’t have anything in this either, but the weird letter from the faculty sort of reminds me of the saying “if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail” - or something like that. As others have posted, this group would see everything through their own personal lens anyway. </p>
<p>If my child were considering the university, I would have far greater concerns about the surrounding city - Nifong as prosecutor, weird police force, lab owners who falsify reports, etc. I wouldn’t have any concerns at all about the school itself…</p>
<p>Our favorite Duke engineering professor asks on his blog that we be kind to the 88 - many good intentioned people in that list. </p>
<p>Also, best wishes to collegemom - only a sociologist would ever read that old thread anyway.</p>
<p>I’m sure there are a lot of good intentioned people out of the 88. I’m afraid though that they may have trusted the authors to convey their thoughts and unknowingly signed on to something very different than what they intended. Either that, or they truly don’t realize the effect of their words. Considering that they are learned professors in the arts and sciences department of one of the most highly respected universities in the country, I would hope that they would thoughtfully consider all interpretations of their words and be sure to clearly spell out their meaning. </p>
<p>I am not an English professor, but I am educated and pretty well read, and I didn’t have any trouble understanding the points that were put across initially by the original “ad,” and secondly by the follow up letter. And, as I stated before, it is insulting for some (not all) of the signers to try to tell me that I am “misinterpreting” their words. I am not stupid, nor illiterate, and their condescension is galling.</p>
<p>“I’m afraid though that they may have trusted the authors to convey their thoughts and unknowingly signed on to something very different than what they intended.”</p>
<p>I agree. The more I think about this, it does seem to be a classic case of “Group Think”. While I appreciate the comments by our resident Professor in defense of some individuals in the “group”, these individuals made the choice to be recognized as a single voice. Sorry. They should have had the fortitude to say “No” to signing on to any more dribble. I doubt that anyone was holding a gun to their heads with one hand, and handing them a pen with the other to sign this letter …:rolleyes:</p>
<p>81 professors seems like quiet a gaggle of professors. </p>
<p>I would think it a Herculean task to get 81 separate professors to agree on much of anything: like herding frogs.</p>
<p>I suspect there was a great deal of internal pressure on Duke’s Best & Brightest to sign on and show their ‘true’ colors.</p>
<p>Are they all from the same department? Coffee-klatch?</p>
<p>Well, they are human too and what they thought they were saying is not necessarily what they said. </p>
<p>I have an acquaintance that is a committee member on student relations at a “second 50” tier 1 university. Her comment is that the faculty universally decrees that there is no racism in the school while the minority students are adamant that racism is rampant. </p>
<p>The original ad could be seen in part as an acceptance of the student view as being valid…</p>
<p>There is probably a very high percentage of professors in the group who teach what I would refer to as “soft” humanities classes. I would bet that there is a very high percentage of women and African Americans on this particular roster (compared to the entire population of professors on campus). There are probably not many science or engineering or economics folks on the list.</p>
<p>So yes, they probably are in the same Koffee Klatch for the most part.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One way to get people with differing viewpoints to agree to sign on to something is to make it rather vague and ambiguous. This happens all the time with proposed legislation, for instance. It also frequently happens with Supreme Court decisions, where a majority opinion has to command at least five votes. The more clearly and precisely worded something is, the more readily it invites disagreement. </p>
<p>Some people appear to find the original “88” ad perfectly clear. I found it to be very vague and ambiguous. (Maybe this relates - at least in part - to the fact that a big part of what I do for a living involves finding ambiguity where others find clarity.) To the extent that this ad is less than clear, perhaps that was intentional - a means of commanding wider support.</p>
<p>Does anyone else find this a bit hypocritical?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-810614.cfm[/url]”>http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-810614.cfm</a></p>
<p>The NAACP does not want the defense attorneys to sway the new prosecutor, but they will be “monitoring” the case and contacting Cooper directly. Hmmm. 
</p>
<p>"At a downtown Durham news conference Thursday afternoon, the Rev. William Barber, N.C. NAACP president, said his organization is “mindful of the long history of sexual violence against women.” The Duke case could potentially have a chilling effect on women, particularly African Americans, filing sexual violence complaints, he said. "</p>
<p>"He also asked that defense attorneys “refrain from efforts to influence Durham citizens regarding the evidence which might be introduced at a trial.” To that end, he urged the State Bar to use its power to limit “the publication of evidence” that could possibly influence a future jury.</p>
<p>Although Barber has not been in direct contact with Cooper, he said he had spoken with Cooper’s staff regarding his concerns about the case and would be sending a note to Cooper to follow up.</p>
<p>Barber expressed satisfaction with a statement made by Cooper this weekend, in which Cooper pledged to “accept these cases with our eyes wide open to the evidence, but with blinders on to all other distractions.”</p>
<p>Those distractions, according to NAACP counsel Al McSurely, came about when defense attorneys, acting in response to statements made by Nifong, began trying the case in the media, poisoning any potential pool of Durham jurors with biased information, he said.</p>
<p>Despite being the author of a list of 82 “Crimes and Torts committed by Duke Lacrosse Team Players” on the state NAACP’s news Web site, McSurely said he and the organization he represents have always advocated for the fair treatment of "both sides. " "</p>
<p>Just for clarification of McSurely’s attempt at being an advocate for the “fair treatment” of both sides, take at look at the list of 82 “Crimes and Torts committed by Duke Lacrosse Team Members” I wish I had the link, but it is on the NC - NAACP website. This list is so full of lies and misrepresentations that it is laughable (it states “facts” that even the prosecutor Nifong has discredited). Frankly, it is an embarrassment to the NAACP to have it printed on the site.</p>
<p>Another take on the pressure being put on the AG of NC - google the Wilmington Press - Cash Michaels, and read the “editorial” posted that is really a thinly veiled threat to the new prosecutors. Basically states that in order to get reelected they must count on the African American vote and unless they tow the party line, they will lose.</p>
<p>The link? If I may…</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.naacpncnetwork.org/Publicity/[/url]”>http://www.naacpncnetwork.org/Publicity/</a></p>
<p>You have to go down about halfway. It’s a big big page.</p>
<p>It starts off as a presentation of “facts” as presented by someone, but quickly goes downhill.</p>
<p>Here are the first 3 of 82</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The Lacrosse Team Captains who hosted the party, including Defendant Evans, lied about their identity to the dance services when they ordered two female dancers.</p></li>
<li><p>The Lacrosse Team Captains who hosted the party, including Defendant Evans, lied about the nature of the party, stating it was a small bachelor party of less than 10 men, and that the dancers would not need an escort.</p></li>
<li><p>The Captains, including Defendant Evans, knew it was the policy of such escort services, particularly when Duke University athletes were involved, to send a bodyguard with a female dancer if the party would have more than 10-15 males in attendance. Other Duke athletic teams have had that experience in the past.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>And just to give you an idea of where it goes, here is #77:</p>
<ol>
<li>The three defendants they have two mountains to climb. First, they must deflect public attention from their boorish, racist, and illegal behavior by mounting outlandish attacks on the survivor and the D.A. Second, they must deal with a mountain of physical evidence, that is corroborated by, we have reason to believe, accounts of some of the men who were at the party who have cooperated with the police and the D.A. from early on.</li>
</ol>
<p>Interesting comment on the “open letter” on Stephen Bainbridge’s blog. It is easy to claim the original ad was misinterpreted when you delete key phrases.
</p>
<p>At least that is what I think the Provost is saying. The fault for the problems at Duke lies not with the administration’s silence, the “88”, false accusations, Nifong or the Durham police but with those that have criticized the faculty.
<a href=“http://dukenews.duke.edu/2007/01/lange.html[/url]”>http://dukenews.duke.edu/2007/01/lange.html</a></p>
<p>"With the passing of time, the heat has not gone down. In the last weeks, faculty members have shared with me emails and blog material that is as merciless, distorted and vituperative as in the past. The cumulative damage of the months of attacks on some of our faculty and the distress of those who sympathize with them is exceeding the limits of prudence about provoking external reactions. It is the Provost</p>
<p>Usually a speech like this throws a bone to the other side. He knows the kids are innocent (he says “despite the recent developments”) and yet there is not a thing about how they are the victims, the wronged, the damaged. </p>
<p>Poor, poor powerless professors.</p>
<p>The left is finding that “power to the people” (bloggers) is not as they had expected.</p>
<p>I thought the Provost’s essay was a well written, balanced, sane plea for reasonable discourse. A bit long perhaps, but I didn’t see that he was blaming anyone for anything. When he was describing some of the hate filled (I love that word, “vituperative”) invective that was directed at some Duke professors I couldn’t help thinking how the Duke lacrosse team was vilified (castrate the hooligans!) but again, I just read the entire essay as an attempt to calm things down a bit.</p>
<p>Or bore people into inertia and apathy.</p>
<p>I can’t help asking this question. It has probably been addressed earlier, but this thread is too long for me to search the entire discussion.</p>
<p>Has anyone considered how their argument is going to affect recruitment? If the racism is as pervasive as some assert and I were the parent of a URM student, I wouldn’t want him or her to apply. If my son were a white athlete, I would feel a similar lack of protection. Is Duke going to become a white southern girls’ school?</p>
<p>The Faculty of both sides needs to cool their rhetoric or they will be facing a student body that is unbalanced in the male female ratio or have to put up with some less intelligent males because the admission committee is working hard to keep a male female balance.</p>