The trouble with judging a book by its cover

If an author can't make the Oprah cut, the next best thing may be getting censured by a university.

[homer]

university rite book wrong wee in indiana do not like books too mcuh notgood to reed indiana universitee good universite do not reed too many bad books must love all do not reed on job bad

[IN FLUX]

Mr. Sampson should file a lawsuit against the University and his fellow co-workers for promoting a hostile work environment. These intolerant individuals didn't even know what the subject of the book was. Just proves that racism has no color. Blacks can be equal opportunity offenders.

[Fell Down Funked Up]

What a joke!

Hey, Indianapolis Star...I read this story LAST SUNDAY in the Rocky Mountain News. Heck, Ruth Holladay's blog had this story nearly two weeks ago. Not only does your pathetic excuse for a newspaper refuse to cover a local story with a local reporter, you simply rerun a syndicated column that much of the country has seen already.

Disgraceful

[William Phillips]

The more interesting thing this piece explains but does not cover is why the media gives Obama a free pass.

The media is afraid of being called racist if they treat Obama the same way they treat Hillary. They have good reason. The Afro/American propoganda machine goes into high gear with accusations of racism real or imagined. Anything other than praise for Obama is racist.

[Phred]

My jaw dropped open when I read this. I can't imagine that a government agency, particularly a university, would cave in to this obvious "heckler's veto." Parker is right on when she states, "What could be more hostile in a university environment than investigating a student's reading choices on the basis of a bystander's perceptions? That's not just hostile, but sinister."

And a big razz to the STAR for not reporting on this themselves. This should have been front page news.

[Dumbledore]

Fell Down Funked Up wrote:

What a joke!
Hey, Indianapolis Star...I read this story LAST SUNDAY in the Rocky Mountain News. Heck, Ruth Holladay's blog had this story nearly two weeks ago. Not only does your pathetic excuse for a newspaper refuse to cover a local story with a local reporter, you simply rerun a syndicated column that much of the country has seen already.
Disgraceful

It's unfortunate that you don't seem to understand the difference between an opinion column and a news sstory. In fact, the Star did cover this story "with a local reporter" back when it originally happened, and again when Charleston sent Mr. Sampson the second letter a couple of weeks ago.

What appeared in today's paper is an opinion column, written by a syndicated columnist. It's not news -- and isn't intended to be. Instead, what a columnist does is to use a news story to make a point about a more general issue.

Obviously, you are incapable of making that subtle distinction.

[IN FLUX]

Dumbledore wrote:

<quoted text>
It's unfortunate that you don't seem to understand the difference between an opinion column and a news sstory. In fact, the Star did cover this story "with a local reporter" back when it originally happened, and again when Charleston sent Mr. Sampson the second letter a couple of weeks ago.
What appeared in today's paper is an opinion column, written by a syndicated columnist. It's not news -- and isn't intended to be. Instead, what a columnist does is to use a news story to make a point about a more general issue.
Obviously, you are incapable of making that subtle distinction.

Dumbleboob the genius apparently missed the story on page B6 of todays Star. The opinion column also appeared today on the editorial page. Read the whole paper before you open your mind and let your brains fall out on the floor Dumbleboob.

[mce]

Dumbledore wrote:

<quoted text>
In fact, the Star did cover this story "with a local reporter" back when it originally happened, and again when Charleston sent Mr. Sampson the second letter a couple of weeks ago.

Did they? When I attempt to search the Star's archives, I only see two results, both from March 14. In addition, the Star is chastised by Eye on Indianapolis for not covering the story locally. Let's face it, the Star just isn't getting it done.
http://eyeonindianapolis.blogspot.com/2008/03...

[Dave Mac]

This story doesn't surprise me. A couple years ago, my wife and I were at the Indianapolis airport waiting in line to get through security. As it happened, I was reading "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by noted historian William Shirer. The cover of the book had a swastika on it which caused gasps of "what are you reading?" from airport personall and promptly got me selected to be searched.

Unfortunately, the level of ignorance far exceeds that of intelligence. Liberals manage to prove it all the time.

[CPT1985]

Parker wrote:

What could be more hostile in a university environment than investigating a student's reading choices on the basis of a bystander's perceptions? That's not just hostile, but sinister.

The truly frightening part is that these are the people who are educating our future. Apparently, with IUPUI staff on the job, 1984 will only be 25 years or so late.

[Steve]

This is going way overboard. Why was the coworker spying on Sampson in the first place? I would ask, Is this book in any of the libraries on campus? If so then the whole arugument is moot. The coworker should try minding her own business. The KKK existed, just like the Nazis and all the rest. Reading history should not be a chargeable offense.

[gawkers]

CPT1985 wrote:

<quoted text>
The truly frightening part is that these are the people who are educating our future. Apparently, with IUPUI staff on the job, 1984 will only be 25 years or so late.

To be fair, the idiots here are IUPUI affirmative action administrators, not the teachers. My professors are in agreement with everyone here. Still, it makes me question just how much I want to finish my degree if this is the reputation my school is going to have.

[Smart Girl]

This is outrageous! And why was this not on the local news and the front page of this newspaper? Shame on IUPUI and local news outlets.

[willydott]

My dad was there. He graduated from ND in 1927 and was an underclassman at the time of the fights. He described those times in detail to me before he died.

What most people don't realize is that the KKK in Indiana was much more hostile to Catholics than they were to Blacks. They were, at least in Indiana, more religious bigots than racial bigots.

The whole basis for Blacks taking offense at this book, or its cover, is flawed.

[Michael]

1. The Affirmative Action office should have noted the complaint, and used common sense to realize it for the baseless idiocy it was, and be done with it. The AA person(s) involved with sending this letter to the janitor should be fired.

2. The person making the complaint needs counseling. I'm not suggesting mandatory counseling, but the lady obviously has issues.

3. If they guy was reading a KKK training manual, that's one thing. Anyone with half a brain (which both the complainer and AA office apparently don't have) would read the book's title and within half a second get what the context is.

OR.,,,, perhaps the complainer can't read and only goes by pictures????

[Stumblebum]

Dumbledore wrote:

<quoted text>
It's unfortunate that you don't seem to understand the difference between an opinion column and a news sstory. In fact, the Star did cover this story "with a local reporter" back when it originally happened, and again when Charleston sent Mr. Sampson the second letter a couple of weeks ago.

Give a link to those articles. I think you are wrong.

The first Star article that appeared on this was yesterday, the same day this opinion piece ran.

[Stumblebum]

Smart Girl wrote:

This is outrageous! And why was this not on the local news and the front page of this newspaper? Shame on IUPUI and local news outlets.

I agree on all counts. This should have been big news.

[Stumblebum]

Dumbledore wrote:

<quoted text>
It's unfortunate that you don't seem to understand the difference between an opinion column and a news sstory. In fact, the Star did cover this story "with a local reporter" back when it originally happened, and again when Charleston sent Mr. Sampson the second letter a couple of weeks ago.

A search of the Star's archive finds no article in the paper about this before March 14, and when I spoke to several editors on March 13 the acknowledged that it had not been covered by the paper.

So, what are you imagining that they published before the day this commentary appeared?