I got a re-tweet from @Unverified_Film linking to Aaron Mandel's review of Unverified. Mandel is editor-in-chief of Clarion Content and claims no allegiance to UNC-Chapel Hill and confesses knowing nearly nothing about the scandal before seeing the film.
Perhaps this explains the curious characterization of former UNC Academic Support Program for Student Athletes (ASPSA) counselors Jaimie Lee and Beth Bridger as "whistleblowers."
I've been waiting for the first reviews from attendees who weren't Tar Heel sports fans. So far, nearly every positive review I've seen has been by pro- UNC partisan. Mr. Mandel's is the first review I've seen from one who is purportedly disconnected from such partisanship.
I wonder if Aaron knows that Lee and Bridger weren't penalized by UNC for blowing the whistle on anything. Does he know that it was their colleague, Mary Willingham, who lent her unwelcome voice to the scandal's unveiling, that much more closely fits the definition? If you didn't already know about Willingham before the film, you might not have even remembered her from the film since she apparently got very little attention, despite also being "victimized" by the University before focus fell on Lee and Bridger in the wake of the Wainstein investigation. Bethel didn't have any issue with the University's handling of Willingham. Why would he? He was supportive of the University leadership back then.
Prior to Unverified's premier, Bethel paid nearly exclusive attention to Willingham and her mentor, UNC History professor and key Athletic Reform Group member Dr. Jay Smith, discrediting and refuting nearly every claim she, and they, made. Bethel said he was angry because she'd disparaged and defamed his colleagues (which would mean Bridger, Bethel, and presumably others too ). They were Willingham's colleagues too at one time, before Bethel had arrived on the scene. But she had confessed her own role in the scheme and, both directly and indirectly, had insinuated her former associates by doing so.
Whereas Willingham had "turned on" the university, Lee and Bridger had remained silent as each investigation or revelation pried out more details. It was the unexpected telling of the counselors' role and complicity in the scandal by Wainstein that left Bethel ultimately deciding to counter with his film, telling the untold story about a nefarious "narrative" cooked up by University leadership and swallowed whole by the media.
You see, for those who were angry with media for sensationalizing and speculating about athletic ties to the scandal, the Wainstein Report was expected to lay to rest the myths and innuendo that had kept the scandal burning in the media; but when the Report alleged academic counselors for athletes were instrumental in the scheme, it was a shock. The Report suggested an athletic department component to the scheme that was too close for comfort. The earlier Martin Report's "not an athletic scandal but an academic one" determination had been replaced by Chancellor Folt now calling it an institutional issue. To have "his colleagues" implicated in wrongdoing launched Bethel's crusade to counter the damage done by a supposedly independent review that perhaps wasn't so independent after all. (Funny how that happens.)
That Lee and Bridger had been punished for doing what Willingham had claimed counselors had done (herself, included) couldn't be allowed to stand. After all, he'd charged Willingham with being a liar, unethical and an untrustworthy witness with ulterior motives. He'd said her former colleagues knew there were issues, but thought they could be managed internally and cooperatively. Willingham, instead, chose to grandstand and go public, which, of course, made her co-workers look bad. Wainstein's report couldn't be accurate because that would vindicate Willingham.
Willingham's role in the "Untold Story" was apparently toned way down for the film, which chose to focus mainly on media sensationalism. Bethel has accused the media of uncritically accepted some Wainstein conclusions while ignoring or misinterpreting others. The film also, surprisingly, drew target on the University leadership itself, departing from his earlier support for their handling of Willingham.
To call Lee and Bridger whistleblowers is misinformed. Bethel, himself, savaged the only one close to being a whistleblower in the story. Willingham is no saint, but she was the only one of those counselors who challenged the status quo. If anyone was interested in educating and not merely engineering athlete eligibility and progress toward graduation, it was Willingham. Her colleagues remained silent; maybe out of fear or conditioning rather than complicity...but maybe not. Until Unverified, we've never heard from any of them other than Willingham. Willingham sued for what she claimed was her poor treatment by the University. Bridger and Lee have chosen, instead to "move forward," only now speaking publicly through an advocate via film.
College deans and faculty overseers and administration and counselors all catered to athletic interests. It doesn't take a reading specialist to see that it wasn't an accidental aggregation of little flaws and failures that led to the scandal. It was a systemic interest in the importance of athletic program success. Julius Nyang'oro was a department chair; and a fan. Debbi Crowder was a staff administrator...and a fan. Janet Boxill was a counselor and faculty...and also a fan. Bobbi Owen was College dean...and a fan. Faculty Athletic Council members are, well, supposed to be faculty first; but they're also fans. Deborah Stroman, and every one of her colleagues who has made the Move UNC Forward appeal, is a fan. Members of the Special Talent admissions committee are fans. Lee, Bridger and every counselor on staff worked hard -- overcoming frustrations and fatigue -- to help those student-athletes. Why? Because they were fans. Of course they loved the players and wanted to help them...in anyway possible.
When identity and pride in athletics achievement becomes ingrained within those who should be auditing and watchdogging potential abuses by athletics, who, then, watches the watchers?
Willingham didn't go along with the crowd, and she had her character assassinated for it, with Bethel leading the charge. "What did we do wrong" says Lee? She stayed silent. She did the job she was told to do. And yes, she was scapegoated for it when the crap hit the fan. Yes, it was the College's responsibility to watchdog the integrity of its curriculum; but Lee, Bridger and others claimed to be educators of those student-athletes too, and saw nothing wrong with exploiting those College academic failures so that the athletic interests were met. It's too bad she and Bridger (not to mention Brent Blanton) lost jobs over it. The buck shouldn't have stopped there.
It was an institutional failure. Faculty failed. Administration failed. Leadership failed. Counselors failed. Why? Because deans, faculty athletic committees, ASPSA leadership, athletic department staff all prioritized athletic eligibility over education. They'll categorically deny it, of course, leaving the blame for some lower level employees and "rogues" to bear; but if anyone was scapegoated, the scapegoats were bearing the sins of somebody.
Whose?
