Connect with us

News Print & Digital

NABJ Criticizes UNC Decision on Tenure for ‘1619 Project’ Lead Author

The lead author of “The 1619 Project” was named to the UNC Hussman School of Media and Journalism Knight Chair

Published

on

The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill recently decided not to award to New York
Times Magazine writer Nikole Hannah-Jones tenure.

The university’s decision to deny the lead author of The 1619 Project resulted in
criticism from various media members and associations such as the National
Association of Black Journalists (NABJ), which is the latest to criticize UNC-Chapel Hill
released a statement.

“The NABJ family has always been proud of her work and impact across the industry
and we have been hopeful about the positive influence she will have at the university in
producing the next generation of students, as she is a celebrated and respected Pulitzer
Prize-winning investigative journalist,” the statement said.

However, the statement won’t be the only manner in which the NABJ aides Hannah-
Jones. The association’s president Dorothy Tucker stated that they’ve reached out to
the university to learn why Hannah-Jones had tenure revoked, despite naming her to
the UNC Hussman School of Media and Journalism Knight Chair, a tenured position.

“If the speculations are true, then we denounce any decision to deny a distinguished
journalist tenure because she simply did her job by reporting facts about slavery in
America,” Tucker wrote.

“The university would be sending a message to its students that it does not support
press freedom and that seeking the truth and reporting it is not a pillar it believes should
be a part of our profession, and that the work of Black journalists, or any journalist, to
expose the ills of slavery and its impact on America is unmerited.”

News Print & Digital

Elon Musk’s Deal to Buy Twitter “Cannot Move Forward” After Latest Hurdle

Musk tweeted that a deal cannot move forward” without “proof” for a fake account estimate earlier revealed by the company. 

Published

on

A couple of weeks ago, Elon Musk shocked the world when he put forth his $44-billion offer to buy Twitter. However, it seems as though the plan to purchase the social media company has hit a significant roadblock.

Musk tweeted that a deal cannot move forward” without “proof” for a fake account estimate earlier revealed by the company. 

“20% fake/spam accounts, while four times what Twitter claims, could be [much] higher,” Musk said. “My offer was based on Twitter’s SEC filings being accurate. Yesterday, Twitter’s CEO publicly refused to show proof of <5%. This deal cannot move forward until he does.”

There’s no clear direction where the deal goes from here. However, during an appearance on the latest episode of The InterviewNew York Times report Kara Swisher predicted that Musk might have to step back and reconsider his initial offer. 

“He should walk away, pay the billion-dollar breakup fee and then wait until it declines. He could pick it up for $15 billion versus $45 billion. That’s a nice savings. There’s a lot you can do with $30 billion,” Swisher said. 

Now Musk might not walk entirely away from the attempt to buy Twitter; nonetheless, that might take more time than initially, some might have hoped. 

Continue Reading

News Print & Digital

Kara Swisher: Elon Musk “Has to Be” Rethinking Buying Twitter at $54 a Share

Swisher does believe a deal will occur with Twitter seeing Musk as its new owner despite these claims. However, she thinks the entrepreneur might have another idea: reprice the bid.

Published

on

Elon Musk made headlines a couple of weeks ago with his decision to purchase Twitter for $44-billion; however, New York Times reporter Kara Swisher stated on the latest episode of The Interview that the Tesla CEO is having second thoughts. 

“He has to be. This price is too high,” Swisher said. “[Twitter] is not worth $54 a share. It’s crazy. It’s like throwing money down a hole.”

Swisher does believe a deal will occur with Twitter seeing Musk as its new owner despite these claims. However, she thinks the entrepreneur might have another idea: reprice the bid.

“He should walk away, pay the billion-dollar breakup fee and then wait until it declines. He could pick it up for $15 billion versus $45 billion. That’s a nice savings. There’s a lot you can do with $30 billion,” Swisher said. 

Walking away from the deal for the social media company might not be easy. But, either way, Musk is undoubtedly taking a hard look at his bid of $54.20 per share by what Swisher is conveying, wrapping up that her relationship with the possible new owner of Twitter as an “up and down” one.

“We’ve had beefs,” Swisher said. “He hasn’t returned my emails. He usually does. He’s talking to right-wing people. He’s friends with Mike Cernovich. Good for him. He’s making new friends. I don’t care. I have four children; I don’t need Elon Musk.”

Continue Reading

News Print & Digital

New Texas Law Will Make It Illegal to Block, Ban Posts on Social Media Outlets

Texas lawmakers ruled last week that makes it illegal to block, ban, remove, deplatform, demonetize, and de-boost posts on social media platforms.

Published

on

Texas lawmakers have put Big Tech on notice following a ruling last week that makes it illegal to block, ban, remove, deplatform, demonetize, and de-boost posts on social media platforms with 50 million or more US monthly users.

The 15-word ruling will most likely set the stage for an intense debate in the Supreme Court and could further divide a nation struggling to interpret free speech and the First Amendment.

According to MSN, Texas’s law, HB 20, which seeks to address the perceived imbalance, was blocked in December by a district court judge who ruled it was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

Trade organizations NetChoice and the Computer Communications Industry Association have appealed directly to the Supreme Court, according to The Verge. In a statement, NetChoice counsel Chris Marchese said the law strips private online businesses of their speech rights.

“The First Amendment prohibits Texas from forcing online platforms to host and promote foreign propaganda, pornography, pro-Nazi speech, and spam,” he added.

The Texas attorney general’s that the appeals court made the right decision and said it would continue defending the Texas law.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 Barrett Media.