More about The Playwickian

Unsigned Editorial: Why we won’t publish the R-Word

Unsigned editorials express the views of the majority of the editorial board.

It is one of the most controversial issues in Neshaminy’s history. It is a topic that no one wants to discuss, but one that needs to be discussed. It is Neshaminy’s nickname, its mascot, its pride. The “Redskin”, Neshaminy’s long-time moniker, has come under fire from community members for its racist origins and meaning time and time again, all to no avail. Many, if not most, community members and students have shown that they do not wish to have the nickname changed; some don’t find it racist (quite the opposite, they think it honors those indigenous to the area), others just want to maintain the tradition. The Playwickian has come to the consensus that the term ‘Redskin’ is offensive. Whether it’s the most basic dictionary definitions , the opinions of many Native Americans, or a more in-depth look at the word’s origins, the evidence suggesting that ‘Redskin’ is a term of honor is severely outweighed by the evidence suggesting that it is a term of hate. It is for these reasons that The Playwickian editorial board has decided it will no longer use the word ‘Redskin,’ or any derivative such as “‘Skins” within its pages in reference to the students or sports teams of Neshaminy High School.

The word ‘Redskin’ is racist, and very much so. It is not a term of honor, but a term of hate. “Our children look at us when they hear this term with questions on why people would use this hateful word,” said Chief Bob Red Hawk member of the Lenape Nation.

The word itself is ambiguous in its meaning and origin. According to the Oxford English dictionary, it refers to the red face paint used by Native Americans back in the 16th and 17th centuries.

Others, like Smithsonian Linguist Ives Goddard, a man now getting press for his research into this issue, believe it is a term created by Native Americans to describe themselves as being “red” compared to the “White” Europeans. But in The Washington Post, Goddard himself noted that “you could believe everything in my article” and not agree with using the word. It’s also possible that through the process of pejoration, says the Oxford English Dictionary, that the word developed its offensive meaning as time went on. Offended Native Americans commonly cite that the “R-Word” ,as many Natives refer to it, is derived from the time period in which Native Americans were hunted for bounty. In addition to referring to the color of the Natives’ skins, ‘Redskin’ refers to the collecting of their scalped skins during the genocide of the Native peoples. “ From the 1600’s to the late 1800’s cash bounties were posted by both British and U.S. governments for the delivery of “redskins,” scalps and body parts,” said Clan Mother Ann Dapice, Ph.D, also of the Lenape Nation. While the word started as a term about face-paint, it grew to be much more offensive through pejoration.

Detractors will argue that the word is used with all due respect. But the offensiveness of a word cannot be judged by its intended meaning, but by how it is received.

An Associated Press poll showed that 4/5 of surveyed Native Americans wouldn’t change the Washington Redskins mascot, and an Annenberg Public Policy Poll showed 90 percent of the same demographic wouldn’t change it.

These numbers may seem low to some, but it must be kept in mind that a sports nickname should not be offending anyone. These numbers could be even higher among local Native Americans, or ones that still celebrate and cherish the Native culture.

Even the most basic dictionary definition of the term describes it as “offensive,” “derogatory,” or “pejorative.” These are also used to describe the “N-word” and other racial slurs. Imagine if Neshaminy had used words of equivalent offensiveness, only for different races. The term ‘ Negro’ is similar to ‘Redskin in its pejorative nature, both started as words without racist charge, but through history , use, and connotation, became words that meant much, much more to the people they describe. It is as unnacceptable to publish the term ‘Negro’ in casual context as it is ‘Redskin’ . The ‘R-Word’ is at least awkward, at most a racist slur.

The Playwickian cannot publish it for these reasons. The change is not being encouraged for the sake of political correctness itself, but for the sake of being respectful and fair to an entire race. If racist institutions had remained in other areas of society simply because they were time-honored traditions America would be a vastly different place.

Look at it our way is the unsigned editorial which represents two-thirds view (14 members) of the Editorial Board.

 
Add a comment

Comments (43)

  1. Redskinsmom Wednesday - 23 / 10 / 2013 Reply
    Why an "unsigned" editorial?
    • Jane Blystone Saturday - 09 / 11 / 2013 Reply
      The editorial is UNSIGNED because it is the correct and professional journalistic way to present an editorial, which is the opinion of the editorial board. Your school's student journalists are being professional by publishing an unsigned editorial. Proud that they are tackling this difficult issue because they believe that the school mascot name denigrates people of color. In an age when so much bullying happens toward various races, it is unconscionable for a school to continue to use such a mascot. I am so glad my alma mater, Indian University of Pa., changed their mascot from Indians to Crimons Hawks, to stand against terms like this that denigrate our first citizens and their descendants. Bravo Playwickian staff for doing the RIGHT thing, even though some people are not willing to do the right thing. Jane Blystone, Ph.D., MJE Journalism Education Association Region 7 Director
  2. Mrs. Buffardi Wednesday - 23 / 10 / 2013 Reply
    Thank you for a well written, factually based article. As a journalist in training it is what the reading public expects of you. It is sad that your identity needs to remain hidden because as a young person you will be bullied for this opinion and I use the word "bullied" loosely! You will be vilified. Which is wrong but you were still strong enough to write a logical, well written opinion piece in the face of certain backlash! Kudos and well done! The name is derogatory according to Webster's and any other dictionary you check. It should not be a mascot for proud sports teams and students of a great high school. Period! End of story!
    • Truth Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
      Nobody here is hiding their identity. It's unsigned because it's representative of the entire staff, not one person. This is common practice for every newspaper.
  3. Anonymous Thursday - 24 / 10 / 2013 Reply
    There's no reason for this to be unsigned seeing as ninety percent of the editors post their opinions on twitter......
    • playwickian Thursday - 24 / 10 / 2013 Reply
      Every daily, collegiate and scholastic newspaper in the country publishes an unsigned editorial. "Unsigned editorials are billed as a newspaper's "official" opinions... And why don't the writers sign their editorials? The reason is that individual editorials are supposed to reflect the collective judgment of the entire editorial board. Though written by different people, they are also supposed to speak with one voice and be philosophically consistent. In practice, of course, editorial boards don't really agree on every issue." http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/1999/03/who_writes_unsigned_editorials.html
  4. Sean Friday - 25 / 10 / 2013 Reply
    You write, "But the offensiveness of a word cannot be judged by its intended meaning, but by how it is received." Since when and says who? There is another school of thought on the issue, "where no offense is intended, none should be taken." You also write, "the evidence suggesting that ‘Redskin’ is a term of honor is severely outweighed by the evidence suggesting that it is a term of hate." Whether "Redskin" is a term of honor is immaterial, but no evidence has been provided, whether in your editorial or elsewhere, that it is a term of hate. Your editorial is notable for its earnestness, but severely lacking in coherence.
    • Mike Thursday - 07 / 11 / 2013 Reply
      No offense intended but if you seriously believe in that school of thought it makes me perceive you as an ignorant, uneducated idiot. See how that works? I do agree the article lacked a bit in coherence and could have been written a bit better, you are right on point there. But if you really don't think that impact>intent, then I truly feel sorry for all of the people of oppressed communities that have to put up with you.
  5. steve Friday - 25 / 10 / 2013 Reply
    So...what you're really saying is, "Sure, we... ...stole your name (The newspaper itself is branded around the "Playwicky Indian Town" settlement, whose land had been "sold" to William Penn) ...stripped any cultural heritage associated with it (I fail to see any recognition of the history of the Playwicky name on your site...and look at your logo) ...profit and you don't (Does any advertising money to the Lenni Lanape's. How about any volunteer efforts?) But, really, we're good people, because ...we won't publish the 'R-Word'" THANKS!
    • Everett Flynn Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
      Interesting points, Steve. Very valid points, too. But none of your points are reason for the editorial staff of this student newspaper to shy away from making this choice. I mean, we've gotta start somewhere, don't we? Establishing a policy that this publication will never again utilize that particular and offensive word seems like a decent place to start, and we should be commending them for having done so. "If not us, who? If not now, when?" And don't bother with the patronizing comments suggesting the editorial board made their choice so they could "feel good" or consider themselves "good people." Allow them the freedom, as citizens of this nation, to take this stand simply because it's the right thing to do. Moreover, it's really a pretty easy choice to make. Doesn't it make you wonder why the Washington Post and the New York Times (and every other newspaper across the NFL and the country) haven't already done so?
  6. anonymous Friday - 25 / 10 / 2013 Reply
    can I just say that even if it is deemed racist by some native Americans, nobody in Neshaminy actually uses it in a derogatory sense. it's never even really been a huge issue until a few weeks ago. this debate isn't even what bugs me. what bugs me is that this is the school newspaper, and yes even though the editorial board are the ones who help run the paper, the matter of whether or not redskin should be kept in should have been voted on by the whole school, because its a paper for the school and not just the editorial board. the only reason I believe they decided as they did was because they knew they would not get the support to ban the word
    • Truth Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
      The editorial board are not "the ones who help run the paper." They RUN the paper. Period. End of discussion. They are protected by law and what the school is doing here is 100% unconstitutional.
    • Everett Flynn Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
      Sorry. But you can't divorce your intent from the subtext and interpretation of the words you use because communication has elements of all these things. When we speak, particularly in forums where we have a wide audience, it's important to understand that there's more at play than just our intended meaning. There is often a subtext to our words that holds a large part of their meaning. And, of course, there is the way our words, and the subtext of our words, is interpreted by others. All of those things, taken together, are elements of communication. It's unrealistic to divorce intent from subtext and interpretation and claim that only intent is important. When you speak, particularly to a wide audience, you have to accept the responsibility of doing so with the knowledge that your words will go out with your intended meaning, and will then be blended with subtext and the interpretations of others who hear you. If you are speaking and saying things some people consider to be offensive, but you have no offensive intent -- well, congratulations. You can proudly claim not to have been intentionally offensive, but rather only ignorant, and racist by accident. What wonderful achievements to proclaim. It's time to wake up and smell the coffee. The word "redskin" is racist, and across the nation, that fact is gaining broader acceptance every day. And when you use the word, it is still racist, regardless of your intent. Defending your intent as non-offensive only serves to paint you as too ignorant to recognize that the offense contained in your words is apparent to more and more people every day.
      • John LaRose Saturday - 16 / 11 / 2013 Reply
        I found your response dead on and precisely identifying the subtle and not so subtle violence done by racial stereotyping. A well crafted response. Thank you.
  7. hesutu Monday - 04 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    It's 2013 and Ann Dapice has still not produced a single citation or reference for her claims about this term - which is the actual word for indian in many of our languages, and is a word used in my family, and by other indians as well. She and Susan Harjo make claims they have no evidence for and which cause much damage and produce nothing of value. An important indian value held by nearly all tribes is truth telling. Without the truth, we have no hold on reality, and we have nothing. Do not be like the white man.
  8. Redneck Friday - 08 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    I for one am very proud of the young men and women who sit on the editorial board of The Playwickian. Like their stance or not, they have the courage to stand up for their convictions.
  9. Jamie Tuesday - 12 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    "Chief Bob" is possible the most generic Native American name ever..
  10. FarmerTom Tuesday - 12 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    While I think your decision to stop using the term Redskin in the paper is misguided, I am equally certain that it is YOUR RIGHT and not the right of any administrator to determine. If Robby McGee wants to start his own paper, let him-- but he can't tell you what to put in yours. He has neither the standing nor the authority. That goes for advertising as well as stories. More than 35 years ago a paper I worked on in my high school decided to stop taking very lucrative ads from a traditional source we decided was not in the best interests of the students. We never looked back-- and we never backed down. Stay the course.
  11. Mark Tuesday - 12 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    I'm a journalist who saw a link to your story at Romenesko.com. I salute you for your courage and your audacity in making this decision. No one would think twice about your banning this arguably offensive word if it weren't your teams' nickname—editors are always making decisions about what words are no longer acceptable. But to come that decision about something so important to your core readership and the institution you cover could not have been easy, and I think it's terrific that you're demonstrating how untenable the word has become. I hope the administrators involved will see that whether they agree with your position or not, they have no business overruling this editorial policy. (Besides, how will they enforce a ban on your ban? Require you to use the word a certain number of times in every issue?) Best of luck to you, and congratulations!
  12. Michele Rossi Tuesday - 12 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    Hello. Your wonderful ed piece and your plight has made it out to the people of the First Nation. Your story has been circulated to four continents! Your school district has been contacted, by phone and email, by leaders from the native world. How incredible you are-- I can't tell you how inspiring your actions are. Hold your ground. You are in the righteous position! Michele M. Rossi, LCSW Doctoral Candidate Urban Affairs and Public Policy University of Delaware
  13. John LaRose Wednesday - 13 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    Here is a copy of a letter I sent to your school administration yesterday. I have devotd my career to eliminating racism and stereotypes. I find the work of your editorial staff commendable. I have been making a concerted effort to inform as many people as possible of your fine work. Stay strong and stay the course. We walk with you. Dear Mr. Robert Copeland My name is John LaRose. I was born and raised in south east Pennsylvania. During the entirety of my six plus decades on this plant I have always taken great pride in my eclectic heritages and geographic origins. I am mixed blood Mohawk, German and French. I still remember the sting of being called a “redskin” during my youth. In response to this racist harassment I learned early in life to do the best I could in hiding my indigenous heritage. Everyone was quite comfortable in my celebration of my German and French linage. I was even raised bilingually, speaking German and English. It was not until in my twenties that I was reunited with my Mohawk relations and truly began learning the plight of my family and all other indigenous families here in the United States. I learned of the genocide, the forced cultural exterminations, the brutal boarding schools and the horrible racism directed toward my native relations. I also learned about the origin of the term “redskins.” For many decades I have worked diligently at helping people understand the horrible impact of racial stereotypes. For my people the Washington Red Skins, the Cleveland Indians, Columbus Day and even the little pilgrim and Indian center pieces during the Thanksgiving holidays remain a terrible reminder of this continued racism. I have heard all of the standard responses ranging from “you’re overly sensitive, get over it,” to “it’s not meant as an insult but rather an honor.” These responses continue to leave me cold. I must confess to being shocked when reading that administrators in a school in Pennsylvania were essential forcing their students to use this archaic and racist terminology in their student paper. http://www.splc.org/news/newsflash.asp?id=2630#.UoGJC0Id9QA.facebook Please understand that from the Native American perspective there is no honorable use of this word as it relates to mascots or school sports. The NCAA has come out with a very strong and committed position on this as it relates to college sports. Just last summer the National Museum of the American Indian delivered powerful and informative history of the use of racist stereotypes in American sports. Clearly the time of acceptable societal use of these ethnic slurs has come and gone. Your students “get it!” They have taken a bold and honorable position. Personally I commend their courage in confronting and addressing this difficult issue. I respectfully encourage the Neshaminy School district to follow the lead of these foresighted and civically sensitive students. You have reason to be very proud of them. Respectfully, A concerned Pennsylvania resident John LaRose
  14. Truth Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    There are some important distinctions to make regarding school newspapers that are unclear in this particular instance. 1. Schools generally go not "own" nor "publish" a school newspaper, which is why they, as government officials, cannot legally restrict the material published therein under the protection of the First Amendment. So, is the Playwickian funded by ads sold by students, or is it a school newsletter financed by the district? Huge distinction. 2. There is a reason Ms. Huber is referred to as the newspaper's "adviser" and not as their "teacher." Even she does not have the authority to restrict a student's right to free speech. See Tinker v. Des Moines for the Supreme Court ruling spelling it out. All Huber can do is literally advise, not mandate. At best, the principal and school board could do the same as her, if they felt like overstepping their bounds (which they clearly do). 3. Even if these authority figures were successful in their efforts to bully and frighten the editorial board into retracting their policy, there is absolutely NO way they could enforce this and make the writers use this word. Ethically it's dubious enough to force someone to use a word they consider a racial slur, but both legally and realistically it make no sense. Good writers will just play the pronoun game or use synonyms and creative sentence structure to get around using the term. Especially since none of the people involved here have a legal right to prior review even, I can't see how they would be able to sprinkle usages of "Redskins" throughout the paper before it goes to press, and when the paper hits McGee's desk at the same time as everyone else, what is his possible recourse? Suspend the editors for not sufficiently using a racial slur? Get real. The paper could just as soon vote to quit covering sports altogether and there is nothing Mr. McGee could do about that, either.
  15. Truth Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    Great job, Neshaminy High School. You just made ESPN, and it wasn't pretty. Keith Olbermann just proclaimed your principal and school board president the day's Worst People in Sports. Think about that for a little bit.
  16. Everett Flynn Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    Way to go, Playwickian editorial board. Good for you for taking this stand on this issue. Here's hoping newspapers across the nation will follow your lead and simply STOP using the word. Hang tough in your battle with the administration over your policy decision. You are in the right. And what's more, you're on the right side of history.
  17. Steve Friday - 15 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    Nice job, Playwickian. You're on the right side of history. The sooner we quit stereotyping and labeling people by color, the better off we'll be.
  18. Wayne Brasler Saturday - 16 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    I'm 73 years old; I was born in 1940. I have seen seven decades of racism, prejudice and ignorance going down the drain in this democracy, blessedly. The Playwickian indeed will find itself on the right side of history. The excuse that insulting and offensive and demeaning words for people of certain races, religions and ethnicities have been used without meaning to hurt anyone has been used as an excuse eternally but, in the end, does not ring true. It is not unusual for young people to be leading the world; they see the world through fresh eyes. I am a journalism and a journalism teacher and a person with a long history in civil rights and I am very proud of the Playwickian staff.
  19. Kyle Sunday - 17 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    I came across this story on Huffington Post last night, and wanted to drop a quick note of support. As a journalist, I truly salute your courage to utilize the rights you have as press to express your views, and stand by your convictions. Many large papers such as the LA Times and New York Times have publicly stated that they will no longer use terms that dehumanize undocumented immigrants. Phrases such as "illegal immigrant" or "illegal alien" will no longer be used, and I salute them as I do you. Papers like this understand the harm such phrases do to marginalized communities, and to the rest, it helps to perpetuate stereotypes. In 2013, frankly, its embarrassing to explain why "redskins" is a racist term; of course it is. And all these appeals to tradition meet precisely the definition of logical fallacy. Think of all the other "traditions" in this country now commonly regarded as racist and oppressive. As the use of many derogatory and racist phrases have gone the way of the dinosaurs, it is efforts like yours that are a part of a larger dialogue working to this end. This isn't, as many would have you believe, "political correctness gone amuck." Because language is often one of the primary ways we make sense of the world, efforts like yours embody one component of many involved in larger anti-racist struggles. Folks who make this claim are simply defending their lazy and increasingly small view of the world, and wish only to force their delusions on to other people. When faced with this kind of resistance, remember that privilege is invisible to those who have it. And of course, the issue of intention is totally meaningless, especially in journalism. Anyway--you're totally awesome, and that you're carrying on despite disapproval from school admin should teach you and them valuable lessons. Thank you.
  20. Kevin Jim Monday - 18 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    There is no doubt of the racist nature of school mascot, and the time to change it is now. Those who think the term "Redskin" is not racist are probably sincere, but having never experienced racism and prejudice first hand, cannot grasp its visceral nature. The Langhorne and Levittown areas have a history of racism, which I experienced (in small part) as one of the few non-whites at Neshaminy Langhorne High School in the late 70's/early 80's. We live in a better world today, now that most of the blatant injustices of the past, such as housing discrimination, are not part of today's Neshaminy school district. Many in the community accepted those practices at the time, but have learned over the years that such racism demeans all of us. Just as our behavior as a society must change, so too must our language evolve. We don't use many once common words once for good reason. Do not bend to the pressure from your principal; repression of journalism does not make for a just society. Words do have power, which is why he is trying to prevent you from changing the words you print. His actions have proven your editorial to be correct. Freedom of the press is the more important tradition to maintain, not clinging to the racism of the past. As a former member of the editorial staff of the Playwickian, I congratulate you on making the right choice. You have provoked the extended community to examine social injustice, and that's in the finest journalistic tradition. Simply outstanding!
  21. Mitch Eden Monday - 18 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    I applaud you for taking a stance and practicing your First Amendment rights. I deplore your administration for trying to censor your voice. Censorship teaches nothing but your opinion does not count. Keep fighting the good fight. It does not matter what side of the argument you are on. The point is everyone has the right to voice it.
  22. Jay Silberman Monday - 18 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    The editors have taken a strong, articulate and reasoned stand -- knowing full well that they would draw heat. But, the light you bring to bear is worth the heat. Congratulations from a 1965 alum. --Jay Silberman Below are copied emails to Superintendent Copeland and Principal McGee, which further reference postings to the New York Times and the Huffington Post. Gentlemen, As a Neshaminy alumnus (1965), ACLU member, a member of the DC Bar, and a former elected member of the Washington DC Board of Education, I took note of the conversation regarding the school's "mascot" and the Playwickian's editors reasoned and courageous stance thereon. Below, for your consideration, are my comments to both the New York Times and to the Huffington Post. Jay Silberman New York Times: I earned a football letter at Neshaminy High School (albeit by carrying water buckets rather than the ball) in the mid '60's, a heyday of greatness for a team that is again winning championships. I have also long lived in DC, home of the professional football team bearing the same name -- which denigrates Native Americans. To both: Change the names! The intent may not have been to offend, but...the name does offend! Neshaminy High School's yearbook is the Chieftain. Similar, and inoffensive. Go with that! The mighty Chieftains! Kudos to the student editors and Playwickian newspaper staff for standing up against the use of a racial slur. You are demonstrating more maturity and better judgment than your elders. And for school principal McGee to myopically suggest that the jury is somehow still out on whether the use of the term "redskin" is or isn't culturally insensitive is just so much waffle and piffle. Perhaps Mr. McGee is really Mr. Magoo. Huffington Post: “Congratulations to the student editors/staff of the Neshaminy Playwickian newspaper for their stand to banish an objectionable racial term. If only Principal McGee had not demonstrated such myopic waffle/piffle (perhaps he is Principal Magoo). I carried water for Neshaminy football, literally (as a team manager, earning a varsity letter), during their 1960's heyday of an unbroken string of victories. Nice to know they still field a strong team. But they could easily rename the team "Chieftains" (the moniker of the school's yearbook) and miss nary a beat in school spirit. For that matter (and I've lived in DC for over three decades), NFL team owner Dan Snyder should also wake up and smell the 21st century coffee. Anyone who thinks the team name is NOT objectionable need only substitute a common pejorative for his/her own ethnicity, and see whether they like it bandied about as an "honorific."” (Another reader's reply to my posting: Jimmie LaBrue on Nov 17, 2013 at 19:46:50 “To ban a word from publication based on moral interpretation is to deny freedom of speech. I believe that is covered in our Constitution. Change the name of the mascot for the school if you wish, and discourage the use of the term "Redskin", but to ban its use is unconstitutional. If this Principal is doing what he is strictly for the preservation on a mascot name then I believe he is in the wrong to do so. But, if he is doing this to preserve freedom of speech then he is well within moral standing. One could look at it as the Principal playing Governor of a State and vetoing an unconstitutional law. I don't normally like to use a "slippery slope" argument, but we are dealing with children, and what will be next on their list of "Banned" words or ideas.”) My reply to Mr. La Brue: “Words are banned from publications all the time, without being a denial of freedom of speech. The editors of the Huffpost, or the New York Times, or thousands of other outlets, publications, networks regularly and routinely set standards for publication. One does not necessarily have a constitutional right, or any right at all, to use unrestricted language in any venue edited or published by others. If the Huffpost or the Times or CBS says that, per their standards, you can not say "pejorative ethnic slur" on their pages or airwaves, then you can not. Yes, you may in your home, or on a soapbox on a public streetcorner. But not in the pages of the Neshaminy Playwickian if the standards set by its editors prohibit it. As a card-carrying ACLU member since 1973 (forty years!), I cherish my First Amendment freedom of expression dearly and I use it regularly. But do you really think one has the absolute right to say anything, to have one's unexpurgated, nasty, vile, insulting provocative, libelous or false words published, anytime, anywhere? Really? Do you also have the right to falsely scream FIRE in a crowded theater? No. Similarly, do you remember George Carlin's recitation of curse words prohibited by the FCC? He poked major fun, and I laughed like h***, but the restriction was law, and constitutional.”
  23. Bonnie Wednesday - 27 / 11 / 2013 Reply
    Fantastic piece. Thank you for standing up for what is right. "...the offensiveness of a word cannot be judged by its intended meaning, but by how it is received." There are many, many folks who agree and support your decision.
  24. Mary Thompson Tuesday - 24 / 12 / 2013 Reply
    I would just like to say how proud I am of this school paper staff. Good on you. I am a Native American woman. You are absolutely on target about not using the "Redskin" name. It is racist and thank you for acknowledging that. I have never met another native person that felt honor from that name. I support you.
  • Pennsylvania School Demands Students Keep Using Racial Slur | Accident Victims Alliance | 502-333-0012 - November 15, 2013

    [...] at Neshaminy High School in Pennsylvania recently attracted a bit of attention when they published an editorial explaining they wouldn’t use the football team’s name, “Redskins,” in [...]

  • An interesting twist on freedom | Gina Deaton - November 21, 2013

    [...] out their editorial here. To read more, click here. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like [...]

  • Racism, bullying, and awkward haircuts. All happening right now at my high school and they need our help. - MODG - November 23, 2013

    [...] would just refer to the football team and other school teams as “Neshaminy.” They wrote this piece stating why. And it was brave. Because they knew there would be backlash. But they just didn’t [...]

  • High School Newspaper Defends Its Ban On The Word ‘Redskins’ Over The Objections Of School Officials | Omaha Free Press - December 24, 2013

    […] been overturned once by school principal Rob McGee. Back in October, the editors of the Playwickian first informed the school community of their intention to stop using the offensive word, only to be told via a […]

  • High School Newspaper Defends Its Ban On The Word ‘Redskins’ Over The Objections Of School Officials - December 25, 2013

    […] been overturned once by school principal Rob McGee. Back in October, the editors of the Playwickian first informed the school community of their intention to stop using the offensive word, only to be told via a […]

  • Hattersjournalism - February 12, 2014

    […] http://playwickian.com/unsigned-editorial-why-we-wont-publish-the-r-word/#comment-535 […]

  • Amazing student staff ed | Bucs' Blade Classroom Blog - May 5, 2014

    […] paper, published an editorial in October condemning the use of the school’s mascot name, the “Redskins.” Similar to the criticism faced by the “Washington Redskins” football team, the staff of the […]

  • Can Student Journalists Ban ‘Redskins’ From Their School Paper? « ??????? ??? ??????? ?????????? - May 6, 2014

    […] started with an October editorial in The Playwickian, Neshaminy High School’s student […]

  • KMBH 88FM | Can Student Journalists Ban ‘Redskins’ From Their School Paper? - May 6, 2014

    […] started with an October editorial in The Playwickian, Neshaminy High School’s student […]

  • Students pay price for taking ethical stance | Gateway Journalism Review - May 14, 2014

    […] keep the nickname, the editors said they found the word Redskin “offensive” and “racist.” They told their readers, “The change is not being encouraged for the sake of political correctness itself, but for the […]

  • -->

    Add a comment

    advert
    %d bloggers like this: