jotsheet

Two weeks ago, I posted a rather innocuous little entry entitled “More of the usual academic hypocrisy on ‘free speech’.” I criticized Northwestern Professor Michele Weldon’s role in a minor brouhaha at the Medill School of Journalism over student comments on The Facebook, wherein Weldon claimed she was “shocked and dumbfounded” at supposedly offensive comments made by Medill students on the website. (For those not familiar with thefacebook.com, it’s the college equivalent of Friendster—a social networking site with a simple idea that’s spread like wildfire.)

Since my post on the subject, I’ve become entangled in some lovely blog drama. (No folks, this isn’t new for me.) Prof. Weldon took exception to my article and called my voicemail, leaving me a vaguely threatening message. Needless to say, I got excited. It’s not every day a professor who’s been on Oprah threatens you!

The voicemail

First, let’s start out with the voicemail. Want to hear it? I’ve got a 300k, 52 sec WAV file for you. Here’s what she said:

Hi Tom, this is Michele Weldon at Northwestern University. You need to remove the contents of those comments about me on your blog site—the offensive, sexual ones that are just not okay. So please do that, I would appreciate that very much. You don’t know the full story of what happened, nor did you…but that’s okay, you weren’t in my class so you don’t know the nature of what happened. But, you are incorrect and you really need to remove the comments about me from your website. I would appreciate that very much. If you have any questions, my numbers is listed at Northwestern Faculty. Thank you.

I have a couple of comments about the voicemail. First, I think it’s interesting that she chose to contact me via telephone. I think that she felt this was the most intimidating method available to her, and by the accounts of other Northwestern students with whom I’ve been in e-mail contact, Weldon is certainly not averse to using intimidation. The normal method of inquiry of the Internet is e-mail, of course, but Prof. Weldon chose not to send me an e-mail. And if she really believed in free speech and the spirit of the blogs, Weldon could have simply left a comment on the original entry. This is the way 99% of discussion, even argument, gets done in the blogosphere. Weldon chose not to do this.

Second, I found it interesting that Weldon did not leave me her phone number, mentioning only that it is “listed at Northwestern Faculty.” When I’m calling someone and I expect a return call, I leave a phone number. I think that she believed that a phone call would be enough to intimidate me into editing or deleting my post and that I wasn’t interested in communicating. She was wrong.

E-mail exchange

I decided not to call Weldon but to e-mail her. I was honestly unsure about what she was “demanding,” given the vagueness of her message, and asked her to clarify. I also asked her to give me the “full story,” since she said I was misinformed. Here is the full text of my e-mail to Prof. Weldon at 4/15/05 at 11:33 PM.

Prof. Weldon responded the next morning, 4/16/05, at 9:26 AM. I found the text of her e-mail very interesting. First, she explained that the reporter from the Daily had mangled her words, which is completely believable. The Daily Northwestern is notorious for this and I’ve had it happen to me. She also made a point of saying that online speech matters in a job context. She made reference to the situation involving Stonecipher from Boeing, who was fired for the content in raunchy e-mails.

Weldon also explained the circumstances that prompted her to send her class-wide e-mail.

The initial problem came because another professor– not myself– was targeted with vicious personal comments with his photograph altered including ones saying he “raped” them with a midterm and they were “butt-f—” by him in the class. I suggested students not use those terms and not be personal in their comments.

At the time I assumed the “altered photograph” must have been quite vicious in nature. It was not. David Spett, the founder of one of the supposedly offensive Facebook groups, has subsequently explained that the professor (not Weldon) was Photoshopped to look like a clown.

In her response, Weldon also detailed the text she found specifically offensive from my original entry.

I have a family. You suggested on your site that I was looking for a spring fling. That is not OK. You also made a comment about my”panties.” That is offensive. I don’t know you, and you don’t know me. But to suggest that I would be looking for a fling with students is a serious allegation that would cost me my job. I am sure you didn’t mean to do that. I am sure you were trying to be funny. But it isn’t funny to me. So please stop. I am sure you would not make your parents proud by saying something like that. And I am also sure you didn’t mean to upset my children with these personal comments about their mother, just as you would not appreciate comments made about your own mother. So please stop.

To clarify:

• The “panties” comment is from “panties in a bunch,” defined by the UrbanDictionary to mean “[w]hen a person overreacts to a trifling insult or barb, or to a joke.” This page even seems to explicitly say the phrase is not sexual.
• My “spring fling” comment was clearly a joke and meant to hammer home the point that Weldon need not be on Thefacebook if she’s offended by it. Thefacebook is for students, not teachers.

I responded to Weldon’s e-mail, explaining, among other things, that both my parents read my blog every day (!). I have no idea how she reacted to that, since she did not bother to reply to me. Here is the full text of my response, sent 4/16/05 at 12:46 PM. It was our last communication.

Fleshing out the story

Since I wrote my original post, I’ve received several comments on the entry and a couple of interesting private e-mails. Though Weldon claims the Daily misquoted her (and they probably did), I think the story I’ve gotten now is worse than what I could glean from what’s in print. David Spett was kind enough to forward me Prof. Weldon’s original e-mail to the 201 Editing and Writing the News class.

One group conspires to give a professor low CTECS, while another uses the word “rape” to describe a midterm. Apparently, anyone who uses that verb casually has never known a victim of violent sexual crime. It is offensive beyond comprehension to me. And it is not funny, satiric or witty. It is wrong.

The “Editing & Writing Made My Quarter Hell” group can be considered “capable of defamatory meaning” and “injury to reputation,” legal definitions for libel in your AP Stylebook. You used my name. You signed yours.

And the hyperbole continues…

What some of you created on facebook about a dear colleague of mine should never have been published– it is vicious. And you have deliberately caused a fine individual harm. It serves no greater purpose and has no newsworthiness. When you publish commentary you make it public.

What I take away from this situation

Clearly, Michele Weldon is not averse to making threats. In fact, in her oversensitive crusade to scrub the Internet clean of insults, I’m reminded a bit of Sen. Joseph McCarthy. Odd, that, coming from a journalism professor, whose very livelihood depends on freedom of speech and of the press.

What is particularly disturbing about this situation is the way Weldon has treated students. She attempted to intimidate David Spett and she attempted to intimidate me. I’ve got no skin in the game at Medill, so she can’t do anything to me, but I still feel bad for the kids there. But as a Northwestern alum, it’s pretty disheartening to see a prof on this kind of censorship rampage. Weldon is in journalism; she should be able to understand that public criticism comes with the territory. Trotting out utterly laughable allegations of libel and holding student comments on a student website for private, student consumption to public standards is sinking pretty low.

A note about copyright

You may have noticed I didn’t reproduce the full texts of Prof. Weldon’s e-mails. That’s because I’ve got the feeling that she could be a rather litigious lass. I spent a couple of hours tonight researching Internet copyright law and the law about voicemail and tape-recorded conversations, and for what I’ve learned in my research, I can thank the good professor. She’ll have a tough time suing me, though. The blogs and libel bit is hard to pull off.

I’ve only quoted her e-mails, not reproduced them. That’s for a reason. If you want the e-mails, let me know and I’ll forward them to you. As to the voicemail—in Illinois, all parties to a conversation must give consent for a recording to be legal. The voicemail involved one party (Weldon) and she gave implied consent, since voicemail, by its nature, is recorded.

So Michele, don’t sue me. How about you post a comment to my blog instead?

UPDATE: I’ve received word that Prof. Weldon will be taking a leave of absence in Fall 2005, possibly due to fallout from the Facebook incident. Since Weldon is an assistant professor, not a full professor, the administration must at some point decide whether to place a long-term commitment in her academic career—to tenure track her—or to set her out to pasture. Her overzealous pursuit of the Facebook issue may indeed influence that decision.

Share This