Long has been the saga of embattled conservative Marquette University professor, and blogger John McAdams. And long has he been a thorn in the side of the progressive machine that runs Marquette University.
As you know, Marquette has been trying to fire McAdams since 2014, even though he has 1. tenure 2. has contractually protected academic freedom and 3. was a very popular professor teaching a very popular class (at least until his exile). The case has been winding through the courts, and will now be heard before the WI Supreme Court.
What did McAdams do that was so profoundly offensive that MU moved to upend his contract, revoke his tenure and fire him? Did he rape someone? Sexually harass students? Post racist messages on line? Steal money? Download kiddie porn? No. McAdams defended a student on his blog who was denied the right to express an opinion against GAY MARRIAGE. The student was denied the right to think differently by his TEACHER at Marquette. His TEACHER told him that being in favor of traditional marriage at a (Catholic!) school is offensive. So McAdams took up the cause on his blog, and NAMED the teacher. The teacher, Cheryl Abbate (who was also a graduate student at MU) reportedly got some nasty emails from people who found her contact information on her own blog. She complained to MU administration. MU's Michael Lovell moved to first suspend, then fire McAdams.
That's it?! Yes, that's it. Marquette fired McAdams because he thought a student should be allowed to hold an OPINION different from a teacher's. Marquette has been trying to fire McAdams for two years because he exposed the liberal groupthink at MU--a liberal groupthink that would deny a student (in a PHILOSOPHY CLASS no less), the ability to participate in a debate over one of the most contentious issues of our time. Why? Because it is politically incorrect on Marquette's campus to hold the opinion that traditional marriage should be protected by the law. Marquette has been trying to fire McAdams because, like any good reporter, McAdams exposed the fascist groupthink--and named names.
Fast forward over 3 years to today. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a habit of trying to create narratives rather than report on NEWS. And that's exactly what they did when they reported that McAdams' case would be heard by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
The Herzog article was so obviously narrative-driven that McAdams, himself, sent a letter to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. In her article, Herzog even claimed that the teacher, Cheryl Abbate, received "threats". Not only does McAdams dispute that, so does Abbate, herself.
Here is the email I received from McAdams about the Herzog story:
Yesterday, the Journal Sentinel ran a badly biased “hit piece” about my case.
Below is an e-mail I sent to JS editorial, outlining some of the problems with the piece. I have notheard back from then.
One additional problem is that they repeated Marquette’s claim that Abbate had received “threats.” This is flatly untrue:
Herzog never thought to question anything that Marquette said.
I’m attaching the capture from Google cache of the version of the story that has Herzog saying that I claimed the right to “say whatever I wanted.”
Here is John's letter to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. As of this post, he has not received a response from them:
From: John McAdams
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 3:17 PM
To: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Watchdog editor, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editor (email addresses redacted by VM)
Subject: Karen Herzog Hit Piece
Are you folks open to an op-ed from me responding to Karen Herzog’s article about my appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court?
It is, in fact, so biased as to deserve the attention of your “public editor” (which I assume you call the “watchdog”).
Just to show how irresponsible Herzog was, she first wrote that “McAdams argued that he could say anything he wanted on his blog because of academic freedom protections.” (I have the saved page, courtesy of Google cache). This apparently was so over the top that it got changed. But what does it say that she originally wrote it that way?
She also failed to state what the graduate instructor I reported on actually did. She said “McAdams said he did it because he felt the graduate student was trying to impose her liberal views on students she taught.” I said no such thing. She apparently failed to explain what the instructor did because she knew that it would lose the instructor sympathy among many readers, and also make it clear that this relates to a much broader issue: political correctness in academia.
Marquette makes much of the fact that Abbate got nasty e-mails, but fails to note that it’s normal journalistic practice, when reporting misconduct, to identify the person being reported on. I can’t imagine the Journal Sentinel reporting on (for example) a teacher who made a racist remark in front of a class, or a cop who used excessive force making an arrest, or a county official accused of sexual harassment without naming the person.
The claim that I exposed her person contact information “as recently as last month” refers to a blog post where I repeated verbatim (including links) a column by George Will.
Herzog extensively quoted Marquette about how evil I supposedly am, but included only two innocuous sentences from my lawyer, Rick Esenberg.
And then, at the bottom of the article, she sends people to Marquette’s FAQ, but doesn’t include any link to my blog, or to the WILL page that presents my side of the story.
Allowing me to respond is about the least you should do. Retracting the entire article would be the responsible thing to do.
*all bold type by VM
This isn't "reporting". This is NARRATIVE CREATION. Last I checked, even on liberal college campuses, "narrative creation" is not journalism.
Here is the cached version of the story where Herzog makes up quotes from McAdams: