Expanding the Witch Hunt

I don’t expect any major revelations on the Twitter scandal or on Chad Washington’s case in the next few days or weeks.

I’m largely grateful for that, even though I know the biggest reason for that is the summer break is coming, the students will be gone from campus, and the offices at the Spectator and WKCR will be mostly empty.

That said, WKCR is now trying to show even more proof that people in the athletics department must have known about many of the offensive Tweets and did nothing about it.

I'm not happy with WKCR for deciding it was appropriate to publicize all the offensive Twitter comments by the players. I'm not sure they were really a necessary aspect of the story after the Washington incident, and I do think this was an attempt to make the story bigger and more exciting.

But the Tweets are now out there and there's no putting them back in the bottle. 

So, I’m trying to find a diplomatic way to clarify this situation for both WKCR and the fans… and I don’t think I can come even close.

Here’s what I can say, (even though it still sounds a bit mean):  there’s no way anyone in the department really condoned the content of the players’ Tweets. I may not have the coziest relationship with the athletic department these days, but I would have no problem defending everyone working there against any accusations of racism, etc. It’s an outrageous charge, and I'm sure it's particularly hurtful for the staffers I know.

I myself have been following a lot of the players on Twitter, and clearly just taking one or two days off from reading the Tweets led me to miss these offensive comments. And I sure hope no one thinks that I condone the comments based on that.

But, (and here’s the mean part), I think some people in the department have too much of a friendly relationship with the players, or seek to be somewhat too cozy with them, and they are unable to really handle the situation as supervisors as opposed to quasi-peers.

That’s just my opinion, and there is no real or implied personal accusation on my part in this case.

As for me, yes, I’ve made friends with some of the more recent players over the last seven years or so. But while they were playing, the relationship was always kept more than at an arm’s length by mutual agreement. I don’t want to violate NCAA rules and I also think it’s creepy for a 40-year-old guy who isn’t a family member or a coach to be regularly contacting  19-year-olds. It’s usually not until well after graduation that I establish what could be considered anything close to a friendship, and even that is rare.

And if the athletes in question were of the opposite sex, I’d be WAYYYY more cautious about any kind of contact altogether.

I just think emotional lines need to be drawn and honored, no matter how much we care about, like and admire our student athletes and coaches.

Anyone who’s read my material over the years knows that while I am obviously a big Columbia “homer,” I draw the line when it comes to defending the indefensible. That was the sole reason why I wrote so much about getting rid of the Norries Wilson regime back in 2011 and that is why I try to present fair criticism of the current coaches as well.

It’s certainly not the athletics department’s job to be impartial in its communications; it should cheer lead as much as possible.

But in its internal handling of things, favoritism can’t be allowed and friendship is not exactly ideal.

I don’t mean to sound sanctimonious, because I know a lot of this is easier said than done.  I’ve made friends with my co-workers and subordinates over the years and I’m sure someone could see many things I’ve done on their behalf as favoritism. But I’m dealing with adults and peers. If my “co-workers” were made up of dozens of college students, the inclination to be their “friend” would just not be there for me.  

When it comes to social media, I’m FAR from an angel myself. I know how things can get carried away in that medium. But there’s got to be better recognition from everyone that we are dealing with very young people here. That means they will do stupid things that don’t necessarily mean much more than immaturity. It also means that better, more impartial, ADULT supervision is required.