The start of term for the University of ILL has started, and the DI has kick-started the semester by holding to its usual standards of journalistic ethics.
On August 7th, Both the News-Gazette and the TASSers at the DI had stories that a report of criminal sexual assault that occurred earlier that day near the Wright and Chalmers (in the general vicinity of the Illini Union Bookstore for those unfamiliar with the area).
Little over a week later, the News-Gazette reported that the sexual assault accusations, according to the UI Police, was "unfounded." The TASSers of the DI reported this on...well, never.
By viewing the link to the DI above, you will see that we Hounds brought this to the TASSers' view that same day (though we were twenty-four minutes behind the first. The DI responded by not even posting the comments (except the one dated August 10) until the evening of the 18th-well after the DI regulated the story far, far away from the news thread. The only way to find it now is via a google search.
In addition, a simple search of keywords, including "Hofstra," at the DI article database tell us a pretty tale. Or rather, confirms one that we noticed some time earlier: According to the DI's reporting (or in this case, lack thereof), no reader would know that the Hofstra students (arguably the most nationally scrutinized false rape next to the infamous Duke Lacrosse Hoax) falsely accused by Danmell Ndoye since the DI did not print a story of any kind.
Do we expect any kind of recanting or clarification? Not really. The DI's parent company, Illini Media, also owns and prints the Buzz. The Buzz prints the "Doin it Well" column by Wantland and Sanger (Jo not Margaret, though they do have a lot in common), which in April of last year, printed a column about the previously-mentioned Duke Hoax that No. 2 thoroughly and appropriately excoriated.
No matter; if we must school the DI some more, then never fear. We are the Hounds and it is our job to watch, correct, and educate when the need arises .
Welcome to the start of term!
Posted by Hound No. 9
Monday, August 23, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
The incoming leader of the University of ILL, Michael Hogan has handily set himself in to the system and repertoire of the institution. Only a month into his tenure, he has managed to lead the institution into a discrimination case for one of his adjunct professors, and he has raised eyebrows about the cost of his services in a time where the state faces record budget deficits, a clear result of fiscal mismanagement, overspending, and conspicuous consumption concerning higher and primary education. An unquestionable benefit resulting from the whole situation is the ever-more stringent scrutiny over university finances, and its disposal of taxpayer monies from the ever-constant shakedowns political allies in the state government undertake on its behalf. Several local news outlets including the News-Gazette and the TASSers at the DI have filed FOIA regarding the costs and identities the U of ILL’s presidential search. While the amount spent on the searches is a story in of itself, there is another result which is even more telling...
Described in a News-Gazette, the U’s reaction is, at least, doubtlessly consistent. All the pertinent names of the candidates and institutions had been blacked out. And airports they may have flown from. And travel agencies. And other expenses
This, in spite of Public Access Counselor Cara Smith's maxim, " the disclosure of this information [said expenses], in and of itself, does not constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
So the university, like so many other institutions, sees fit to rationalize and hide behind FIOA privacy clauses, as well as the misapplied FERPA exemption, in order to protect its own inconvenient truths.
Despite all of Hardy' claims about how we need to protect the privacy of candidates fielded for the leadership positions, he never answers the most fundamental question that arises: why do we need to protect the identities and privacy of the applicants? Should not the shareholders of the university, as the IPA's Craven asserts, be privy to exactly what type of candidates are fielded, especially in a plus-$300k deal? Considering the growling and hissing about how Professor Howell was employed through the Newman Center, why should not the rest of the professtocracy and administrators be held to the same amount of transparency? Hardy obviously subscribes to a much different type of transparency: the B.J. White kind. If, as said, that sunlight is the best disinfectant, the U of ILL could quite easily rival the the brilliance of say, Minakami Village.
Hardy may speak more accurately than he realizes when he challenges the view of the Illinois Press Association counsel, that the U of ILL thumbed it’s nose at the public. A more accurate assessment would be to say it lifted its leg on the public.
Posted by Hound No. 6
Described in a News-Gazette, the U’s reaction is, at least, doubtlessly consistent. All the pertinent names of the candidates and institutions had been blacked out. And airports they may have flown from. And travel agencies. And other expenses
This, in spite of Public Access Counselor Cara Smith's maxim, " the disclosure of this information [said expenses], in and of itself, does not constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
So the university, like so many other institutions, sees fit to rationalize and hide behind FIOA privacy clauses, as well as the misapplied FERPA exemption, in order to protect its own inconvenient truths.
Despite all of Hardy' claims about how we need to protect the privacy of candidates fielded for the leadership positions, he never answers the most fundamental question that arises: why do we need to protect the identities and privacy of the applicants? Should not the shareholders of the university, as the IPA's Craven asserts, be privy to exactly what type of candidates are fielded, especially in a plus-$300k deal? Considering the growling and hissing about how Professor Howell was employed through the Newman Center, why should not the rest of the professtocracy and administrators be held to the same amount of transparency? Hardy obviously subscribes to a much different type of transparency: the B.J. White kind. If, as said, that sunlight is the best disinfectant, the U of ILL could quite easily rival the the brilliance of say, Minakami Village.
Hardy may speak more accurately than he realizes when he challenges the view of the Illinois Press Association counsel, that the U of ILL thumbed it’s nose at the public. A more accurate assessment would be to say it lifted its leg on the public.
Posted by Hound No. 6
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Update on UC Davis
The MSU has appealed the ruling that has put the student group on probation after the groups members conspired to disrupt a presentation given by former ambassador Michael Oren at UC Irvine. In the midst, there has been significant reaction to the issue on the ed blogs and from First Amendment groups.
Yet, we have been disappointed in the coverage of the incident and the subsequent punishment of the MSU involved in the incident. Other than the Los Angles Times, no major commentary on the incident has highlighted a very important part of UC Davis recommendation to suspend. As the recommendation states,
The other sections 102.13 through 15 are free speech matters which most of the commentary has focused on to date. The 02 section, however, we see as the most serious. Regardless of any appeal by the MSU towards their actions at the lecture, giving false testimony ought to be enough to reap some consequences. Given now that emails from members of the MSU and organizers of the disruptions demonstrate that the disruptions were premeditated and were carried out with the blessing of the MSU, contradicting earlier claims by members that the individuals arrested were acting independently.
It is unfortunate that the controversy is a victim of obfuscation by making it something it is not. Like the dog pile with Ward Churchill, this is no longer a free speech issue; now it is a criminal issue.
Posted by Hound No. 8
Yet, we have been disappointed in the coverage of the incident and the subsequent punishment of the MSU involved in the incident. Other than the Los Angles Times, no major commentary on the incident has highlighted a very important part of UC Davis recommendation to suspend. As the recommendation states,
"...the MSU, and each of its authorized signers, violated
the following University Policies:Section 102.02 :
Other forms of dishonesty including, but not
limited to fabricating information, false information, or reporting a false
emergency to the University."
The other sections 102.13 through 15 are free speech matters which most of the commentary has focused on to date. The 02 section, however, we see as the most serious. Regardless of any appeal by the MSU towards their actions at the lecture, giving false testimony ought to be enough to reap some consequences. Given now that emails from members of the MSU and organizers of the disruptions demonstrate that the disruptions were premeditated and were carried out with the blessing of the MSU, contradicting earlier claims by members that the individuals arrested were acting independently.
It is unfortunate that the controversy is a victim of obfuscation by making it something it is not. Like the dog pile with Ward Churchill, this is no longer a free speech issue; now it is a criminal issue.
Posted by Hound No. 8
Monday, July 19, 2010
NEA Con 2010
The Ant over at the EiA has some tidbits from the National Education Association's convention in New Orleans. Compared to the antics at Comic-cons and Sci-Fi-cons , the Cons-cons here really act like denizens from outer space.
Two of our favorites:
“Move that NEA RA 2010 New Orleans Delegates stand up and leave the convention center to send a clear message to protest against Public Schools’ budget cuts on July 6th (last day RA) for ‘one’ hour during lunch time (discretion of NEA President for time of lunch). NEA staff will contact TV news to get media coverage and organize the exit of members in an organized manner.”
Nothing says more the modus operandi of the teacher unions from California than if you want something done for yourself, make someone else do it. Imagine the sight: the CTA at the podium speaking to the crowd "Now, all you from New Orleans, you get up and go outside now while we're all eating and we'll watch. And cheer. What? Sorry. You'll just have to make do with whatever is left over at the buffet when you get back." Very droll!
2. Good news for Chris Christie: Other than some Jerry Springer-style wailing by Van Roekel at him, it looks like he is small time now. Arne Duncan appears to be Enemy #1on the NEA Hit List. Also from Ant:"While introducing New Business Item 42, which directed NEA to “call on the U.S. government to end the war in Afghanistan,” delegate Nancy Porter from the Iowa State Education Association said: 'Bring home the troops and send in the Peace Corps and Teachers for America (sic).'"
Wow.
No question the highlight was Bob Chanin packing it in. Quite a confession he makes here (you can stop after the 1:00 minute mark):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-piPkgAUo0w
"It is not because we care about children, and its not because we have a vision of a great public school or every child..."
Need we hear more?
Posted by Hound No. 4
Sunday, July 11, 2010
New Page
With the new Page Designer tools, we have been able to give the ol' Doghouse a summer paint job.
We decided to take advantage of the change of appearance for two reasons. One, and the more obvious of the two, because the template looks nicer. Two, and probably the more important of the two, is because it is used as well by UIC pro-PC education blogger.
Still, myself and No. 1 are still not entirely sold on the color, and a couple of the fonts are not quite right. Also, we are still waiting for someone to invent a couple of gadgets we would like to utilize.
Posted by Alpha Hound
We decided to take advantage of the change of appearance for two reasons. One, and the more obvious of the two, because the template looks nicer. Two, and probably the more important of the two, is because it is used as well by UIC pro-PC education blogger.
Still, myself and No. 1 are still not entirely sold on the color, and a couple of the fonts are not quite right. Also, we are still waiting for someone to invent a couple of gadgets we would like to utilize.
Posted by Alpha Hound
UI fires Catholic Prof for Teaching...Catholicism (Updated)
Professor Kenneth Howell was shown the back door last week for writing about...the back door. And worse, he was writing about Catholicism.
Prompted by an interesting complaint letter (more on this in a subsequent post) dated from early May, Howell was removed for "hate speech" by Robert McKim, chair of the Religious Department. McKim is conveniently out of the country at the moment.
No mention of the case yet by FIRE, but the Alliance Defense Fund and the AAUP have both offered legal and moral support, respectively, for Professor Howell.
Given the recently exposed developments of behind-the-scenes shenanigans by the U of ILL in recent months, the developments of this story will be fun to watch as the facts continue to come to light-a process that the UI always finds extremely deplorable.
The case recalls the time when Acton Gordon was fired for printing the Jylland-Posten Mohammad Cartoons.
Posted by Hound No. 9
(Update 7-10-10 23:00pm):
The UIUC Atheists, Agnostics, and Freethinkers have posted that they too find the administrations actions wrong.
Prompted by an interesting complaint letter (more on this in a subsequent post) dated from early May, Howell was removed for "hate speech" by Robert McKim, chair of the Religious Department. McKim is conveniently out of the country at the moment.
No mention of the case yet by FIRE, but the Alliance Defense Fund and the AAUP have both offered legal and moral support, respectively, for Professor Howell.
Given the recently exposed developments of behind-the-scenes shenanigans by the U of ILL in recent months, the developments of this story will be fun to watch as the facts continue to come to light-a process that the UI always finds extremely deplorable.
The case recalls the time when Acton Gordon was fired for printing the Jylland-Posten Mohammad Cartoons.
Posted by Hound No. 9
(Update 7-10-10 23:00pm):
The UIUC Atheists, Agnostics, and Freethinkers have posted that they too find the administrations actions wrong.
Friday, July 9, 2010
Buckey badgered and bucked under Clout
News has reached us that ILL is not the only state that has higher ed institutions which are sick at heart. Nor are the Hounds the only ones with a clout scandal in their midst. Now, the badgers do too.
A Wisconsin state senator is calling for an investigation by the attorney general for the political appointment of Jim Doyle's top aide by system president, Kevin Reilly, for the position of the UW system's chief operating officer. Michael Morgan will start with a approximately quarter-million dollar salary.
What Rep. Nass finds duplicitous was that Reilly never had a search committee, which Nass claims is required for any high level administrator for the UW. In addition to the suggestion that this was a political appointment, we gather by the implication in the AP story, that affirmative action laws were violated by circumventing a wider applicant pool in order to ensure an african american was hired.
We find the race issue unlikely (but certainly possible), and believe that if there was any hiring of Morgan done strictly on the basis of race, it was committed by Doyle when he had Morgan in his previous position. Rather this is more likely another example, as the Tribune puts it, clout going to colleges. Which is in of itself, quite scandalous, even minus the race matters.
Reilly has had damage control experience already. This was after it was revealed the UW Madison had hired 9/11 skeptic, and child-beater, Kevin Barrett.
Posted by Hound No. 6
A Wisconsin state senator is calling for an investigation by the attorney general for the political appointment of Jim Doyle's top aide by system president, Kevin Reilly, for the position of the UW system's chief operating officer. Michael Morgan will start with a approximately quarter-million dollar salary.
What Rep. Nass finds duplicitous was that Reilly never had a search committee, which Nass claims is required for any high level administrator for the UW. In addition to the suggestion that this was a political appointment, we gather by the implication in the AP story, that affirmative action laws were violated by circumventing a wider applicant pool in order to ensure an african american was hired.
We find the race issue unlikely (but certainly possible), and believe that if there was any hiring of Morgan done strictly on the basis of race, it was committed by Doyle when he had Morgan in his previous position. Rather this is more likely another example, as the Tribune puts it, clout going to colleges. Which is in of itself, quite scandalous, even minus the race matters.
Reilly has had damage control experience already. This was after it was revealed the UW Madison had hired 9/11 skeptic, and child-beater, Kevin Barrett.
Posted by Hound No. 6
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)