I'm ready to be corrected by someone more in this world, but the magnitude of the issue suggested by font size and striking headline sure doesn't seem to match with "JMU elected not to provide a breakdown of COVID stats all the way to a per-dormitory basis based on their interpretation of the demographic data subset of 'individually identifiable health information' and the Breeze disagreed with that decision."
The Breeze will not win this one.....
(08-19-2021 12:31 PM)LovethoseDukes Wrote: [ -> ]The Breeze will not win this one.....
I think it is less about a law suit and more about making a story out of it.
The Breeze is located on the JMU campus, correct? No idea if the writers get paid or not, but they don't seem to fit the "independent" part of free press as they are a part of JMU.
I could see this going very wrong for the Breeze. JMU has a lot of muscle and if they wanted, they could destroy The Breeze. They could force them off campus anddisallow the mass distribution of the paper on campus. JMU could prevent logo usage as well as MANY other things. I don't think JMU wants to do that as it wouldn't be a good look. But if their hand is forced in this, The Breeze could get eaten alive.
I don't think this will ever make it to the courtroom, and if it does, The Breeze will be on its own which could be a death sentence (even if they won- which they won't).
I'm going to assume the breeze is financially supported by the school? I will certainly assume they utilize their assets that could serve other parts of the school. I'll assume that JMU will heavily leverage in-house counsel for the this, but will incur some level of incremental expenses dealing with this.
Well basically..... why does the breeze love to bite the hand that feeds it? W/e this is. The secret meeting thing that I believe they pushed. Trying to strongarm Bourne on fees. It seems like they unnecessarily pick fights that have very little upside and in the meantime make them look like hypocrites.
I generally respect the institution of the Breeze, and feel it has done some positive things over the years as a voice for the students.
I also feel the current admin has been a bit shadowy in some of their actions, specifically when it comes to board actions. I'm not a fan of Algers actions to keep discussions off the public record.
Honestly though, this particular suit is a bit ludicrous and just picking a fight "on principal" for something that is so limited it seems to have very little journalistic value at this time (covid breakdowns by dorm/location for the time prior to Sept. 17, 2020. It is possible JMU doesn't even have this data or would be very difficult to compile retroactively)
Even if the Breeze's pro se lawsuit succeeds here and they get this data, really it just comes across as a pointless vendetta/fight. Feels like they haven't learned to pick their battles well. This is not the hill to go die on.
Source: Fox News, 8/19/21
"The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.
After the training was completed, student employees were sent an email instructing them to "not share these materials with others."
A JMU spokesperson told Fox News in a statement that the training was an "opportunity" for students who work in the Office of Student Affairs."
Better go ahead and lock this thread Zac
(08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote: [ -> ]Source: Fox News, 8/19/21
"The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.
After the training was completed, student employees were sent an email instructing them to "not share these materials with others."
A JMU spokesperson told Fox News in a statement that the training was an "opportunity" for students who work in the Office of Student Affairs."
Who is the "they" in the first sentence? Who gave themselves the authority to judge others by categorizing them and calling them out simply for being in that category? This sounds like a bunch of dopey 19 year old liberals who like to put the word "justice" at the end of everything they want others to bend over backwards to give them for free because they're like, offended and stuff.
I can't keep up with this. I didn't realize that Romantic Orientation was a Social Identity. I also find it laughable that the most spoiled generation is classified as oppressed.
we have entered bizzaro world officially..pls don't lock this thread - if anyone can't handle calling out that this has all gone too far, then you aren't operating in reality. Inclusion is becoming quite exlusionary
"American"
what in the hell.............pound sand alger Alger (edited to keep the discourse civil)
(08-19-2021 03:50 PM)Bill Wrote: [ -> ] (08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote: [ -> ]Source: Fox News, 8/19/21
"The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.
After the training was completed, student employees were sent an email instructing them to "not share these materials with others."
A JMU spokesperson told Fox News in a statement that the training was an "opportunity" for students who work in the Office of Student Affairs."
Who is the "they" in the first sentence? Who gave themselves the authority to judge others by categorizing them and calling them out simply for being in that category? This sounds like a bunch of dopey 19 year old liberals who like to put the word "justice" at the end of everything they want others to bend over backwards to give them for free because they're like, offended and stuff.
The pronoun "they" does not always require an antecedent, however, in this case it refers to JMU as a group, one could contend Jon Alger et al
The funny thing is the number of people who fit in all the privileged boxes across the board are like less than 6 per 100,000 people so then that would make them in the extreme minority to the point that they would be also disadvantaged somehow.
I think the purpose of such lists is to let everyone have an out why they themselves are "ok" because they are also oppressed by society and can be an ally to whatever cause they support yet still gives them some free reign to accuse all others of being priviliged (most of which would be based on superficial reasons because many of the oppressed/target categories wouldn't be apparent just by passing someone on the street).
Did this even really happen? Seems like one of those, I could see it but also could see it being a fake story someone made up to get back at a person or office for not hiring them.
(08-19-2021 02:41 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ] (08-19-2021 02:25 PM)streamerlauncher Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.foxnews.com/politics/james-m...-oppressed
Well, JMU made national news....
Nothing in that article is news. LolFox
Oh, OK. I’ll wait for Jim Acosta then. Even though he is still not over losing his SGA seat though…at least Fox linked to the training to back up the story…which is all about bias (I watched it). James Madison is turning over in his grave. Maybe we should just petition the school to rename itself…Woke University seems to be available still.
What will really be confusing for these kids, many that don’t even know how to do their own laundry or prepare their own food, will be trying to determine which group they belong to. Are they privileged/agents or oppressed/targets when they may check multiple boxes on each side?
Quote:The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" and those they characterized as "oppressed" or "targets." Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.
Among the oppressed groups, according to the presentation, are people who identify as Black, Asian, Latinx, non-Western European, LGBTQ+, homoromantic, Muslim, Jewish, working class, overweight, or disabled, among others.
Divide and conquer... the left trying hard to pull blue collar back in, not gonna work