Coaching the Mind @BethelLearning
Journalists are supposed to hold those in power accountable. Dan Kane contributed to the scapegoating of low-level employees. #NotAHero
B. Martin @yibyabby
I gotta ask: who are those in power that you feel should be held accountable for the scapegoating?
Coaching the Mind
Any of those high-ranking people who favored firing two counselors who weren't hired until years after the paper classes started.
B. Martin
You might be intentionally avoiding naming names, but such a group would have to include Ross, Folt and/or Dean.
Coaching the Mind
I'm not intentionally avoiding names. I suspect BOG was driving those decisions, but I'm not connected to the politics that high.
B. Martin
Am I right to assume that these same BOG influences were the ones who you believe influenced the WR "narrative" as well?
B. Martin
I used "quotes" since you've said Wainstein had a narrative; but I was never clear about whose narrative he was promoting.
Comment: Bradley Bethel has not responded since, but a supporter joined the dialogue:
Tal Link @talunc
many believe wainstein was a product of several prominent BOG members from certain other system schools
Tal Link
also wainstein said he started with Kane's articles-hard to be impartial when starting there
B. Martin
The PP conspiracy [theory] is BOG protects UNC-CH, but the "many" you speak of believe elements of BOG undermined UNC via WR?
Tal Link
a couple, check some BOG members at the time-one even wrote an intro to "tarnished" his son was on BOG also
Tal Link
many interviewed say they were taken out of context or comments not correct-Wainstein didn't allow recording
B. Martin
Okay, but why? At whose bidding? Who would want to enable"scapegoating" of lower level UNC-CH employees?
B. Martin
Surely Dan Kane isn't responsible for whatever agenda Wainstein had or for penalties stemming from his report.
Tal Link
no but seems like an unusual place to start if being neutral, also why not record?
Tal Link
but instead base many conclusions on opinions of interviewers??
B. Martin
Ross/Folt hired Wainstein; but a couple of ABC BOG members biased him, using Kane as investigation start point?
Tal Link
Don't think Folt would have done that on her own-waste of 3.5 million dollars
B. Martin
Not if the goal was to control damage. Scapegoats are damage limiters. Who's responsible for scapegoating Lee/Bridger? BOG ABCers?
B. Martin
BTW, I do appreciate your input, but I won't presume that you speak for @BethelLearning unless he says so.
Tal Link
def don't speak for BB, maybe BOG members prompted/forced Folt/ Ross to another investigation?
Comment: After reading and considering Tal Link's posts, I tried to summarize what he was saying in a series of four connected tweets, to make sure I was understanding his point(s) and that my inability to follow the rationale wasn't based on misunderstanding. I've indented Tal Link's responses since he replied to individual segments of the 4-tweet series, but not to the point on the whole:
B. Martin
Doesn't make sense to me. Does it to you? Some anti-UNC BOG members coerced Folt/Ross into hiring Wainstein, or …
Tal LinkB. Martin
Some BOG members wanted another investigation esp Mtichell and then son
… after Folt/Ross hired an independent KW, the people managed to influence the investigation to UNC's detriment …
Tal Link
wainstein should have recorded interviews and used exact quotes instead of relying on interviewers interpretation
Tal LinkB. Martin
wainstein Started with Kane's work instead of from scratch
… and also managed to get Folt/Ross to go along with the results of this anti-UNC agenda-driven investigation …
Tal LinkB. Martin @yibyabby
Folt had no choice
@talunc @BethelLearning … and then, based of this faulty WR, get Folt/Ross to bring the hammer down on some lower level employees, only. ?
Comment: this is where the thread stands, as of midday, September 25th. I'm still unclear as to who it is that should be held accountable for the alleged scapegoating of those former low-level UNC-Chapel Hill employees: namely Beth Bridger and Jamie Lee.
If accountability is traceable to a portion of NC Board of Governor members with a vendetta toward UNC-CH, why would a goal -- even if merely incidental to the larger scheme of things -- be scapegoating the likes of Bridger and Lee? Adversaries don't typically want sacrificial lambs.
And how would they have managed to shape the agenda of Kenneth Wainstein, strong-arm Chancellor Folt and President Ross into not contesting the flawed investigation, even to the point of coercing them to regretfully discharge a handful of worker bees who were merely following the practices of predecessors and more senior mentors?
And finally, how does this fall back on News & Observer reporter Dan Kane? Even if his work and that of the editorial staff at the N&O is skewed, inaccurate and biased, does not culpability for "scapegoating" rest with those doing the actual scapegoating and not the producers of the information on which the scapegoat decision was based? I can pretty much guarantee Kane is not satisfied that his investigation has succeeded with the offering up of scapegoats by someone in the UNC system or NC Board of Directors.
If one believes that media sensationalism and irresponsible reporting has contributed to a negative public perception and has had deleterious impacts on the institution, employees and students, I can understand the criticism and antipathy toward such news media practices. But wouldn't those who had an actual hand in bringing to bear the impacting actions resulting from said media influence, be as much, if not more, worthy of criticism?
The buck has to stop somewhere with regards to the firing of Jamie Lee and Beth Bridger. If those actions were truly an injustice, then who was responsible? It makes no sense to me that some anti-Chapel Hill BOG members would be where that buck belongs. They wouldn't want scapegoats. It would be an opponent of theirs that opted for scapegoating. Finding a scapegoat is a method of damage control. Anti-UNC BOG elements would not want to limit damage to patsies.
