Search News


Browse Archives

News

Did Bill O'Reilly Doom a Tenure Bid?

May 18, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

In many academic circles, being attacked by Bill O'Reilly might be a badge of honor. A Syracuse University professor, however, charges that he was denied tenure last week in part because of the fallout over his on-air disputes with the Fox television star, who has branded him "a new Ward Churchill."

Boyce Watkins said that the university has responded to attacks on him in ways that are different from how it handles other controversial statements made by professors, creating a stigma around his work because it does not conform to "white liberal" ideas about race.

And Watkins, who is black and who teaches finance, said that an e-mail message that was not intended for him, but which he received and has forwarded to Inside Higher Ed, shows that professors view his public statements in a negative light, and that he couldn't get a fair tenure review.

Watkins has appeared frequently on CNN and various other news shows, offering outspoken commentary that, while earning him the enmity of O'Reilly, has also won him many fans, who say that he voices ideas that tend to be skipped over in national debates. With Watkins vowing to sue the university (and to continue to speak out), this case is likely to set off debates about race, public intellectuals and how universities respond when their faculty members are attacked. And while many parts of the tenure process are off limits, many of the statements at issue are not only public but on YouTube, providing fodder for those seeking to draw their own judgments on Watkins (or O'Reilly).

The dispute with O'Reilly took off in 2007 in the aftermath of controversial remarks he made on a radio show in which he described a trip to Sylvia's, a famous Harlem restaurant. O'Reilly spoke at length about how he "couldn't get over" how the restaurant -- black-owned, and primarily with black customers -- was full of "respectful" people. He talked about how it was just like "going to an Italian restaurant" and how there wasn't "any kind of craziness" or anyone "screaming, 'M-Fer, I want more iced tea.' "

O'Reilly maintains that the comments were part of his effort to show that all people are the same, but his repeated expressions of surprise that one could have a civilized dinner in a black-owned restaurant in a black part of town struck many people as offensive and ignorant. Responding to the dispute, O'Reilly then interviewed Juan Williams on one of his television shows, and Williams expressed support for O'Reilly.

Then, appearing on CNN to talk about the controversy, Watkins said that O'Reilly's comments should be seen as part of his pattern of "demeaning, degrading and devaluing" black institutions. For O'Reilly to praise Sylvia's and its customers as he did, Watkins said, was like O'Reilly going to a black home and congratulating those there for having a mother who is not a prostitute. The underlying assumptions show ignorance that would be similar, he said, to judging all white people by those who appear on "The Jerry Springer Show." And he said Williams was playing the role of the "happy Negro" in helping O'Reilly. (This CNN report available on YouTube features the original O'Reilly broadcast and much of the commentary.)

At this point, Watkins and O'Reilly started speaking out against one another, with O'Reilly focusing on the comments Watkins made about Williams. O'Reilly even sent an "O'Reilly Factor" producer to Syracuse to track down Chancellor Nancy Cantor and demand that she apologize for the impact of Watkins and his statements. Calling Watkins "one of the worst race baiters in the country," O'Reilly said that Watkins was using Syracuse University as a platform so Cantor should speak out against him.

She didn't -- and instead repeatedly told the Fox producer that Watkins was "an individual speaking for himself." Based on that, O'Reilly went on to blast Watkins and the university. "Like Ward Churchill at the University of Colorado, Watkins hides behind academic freedom in his villainous pursuits. But Syracuse University should have academic standards, and it apparently does not. Again, Watkins is using the university as cover," O'Reilly said.

That incident led the university to issue a statement that, while affirming the right of Watkins to express himself, specifically noted that his views did not represent those of the university. Some questioned whether the university should be issuing such statements when they aren't routine.

Joel Kaplan, associate dean for professional graduate studies at the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, told The Daily Orange (and confirmed to Inside Higher Ed that this reflected his view) that the university statement was "outrageous" because of the lack of such statements every other time a professor said something controversial.

"Every week you could pick up the Syracuse Record, and on page three there's a listing of faculty members who have spoken in various venues. In not one of those places are those people forced to say they speak for themselves and not the university.... The question is why did they release a statement for Professor Watkins and not for the 400 or 500 other professors that speak in a public forum?" Kaplan said.

Watkins said that this singling out of his statements was a sign that he would not be treated fairly in his tenure review. Further, he noted that after the controversy broke, many of his colleagues in the business school received e-mail from O'Reilly fans. Many of the e-mail messages were sent to all faculty members. One faculty member, who Boyce said subsequently played a key role in his tenure case, hit "reply all" and so sent the response to Watkins, among others. In the response, Patrick Cihon, called Watkins a "blowhard" (and called O'Reilly the same thing). Further exchanges with Watkins -- which he forwarded to Inside Higher Ed -- feature Cihon, in a friendly supportive tone, inviting him to discuss the issues in person and suggesting that Watkins reconsider his approach to speaking out. (Cihon declined to comment for this article, saying all tenure reviews must be confidential.)

Cihon isn't the only one offended by some of the Watkins statements. An editorial in The Daily Orange said: "Watkins was certainly entitled to say what he thought about Williams on the show. But calling another black man a 'happy Negro' hardly displayed the kind of intellectualism that Watkins proudly boasts. His talk radio remark actually undermined any of the notable comments he made during the program."

Watkins said that these incidents show what he knew all along, that places like Syracuse "don't tenure black people like me." The university made it clear he was different from most faculty members (by issuing the statement about him) and ignored the way faculty colleagues who disagree with him would judge him, Watkins said. He said that Syracuse is dominated not by racists, but by people who accept certain views of how professors should act and what they should say, and that these views run counter to his sense of his duty as a black public intellectual. (Among the other issues on which Watkins is outspoken and that may cause discomfort in some academic circles: His call for the National Collegiate Athletic Association to start paying athletes, ending what Watkins calls the "exploitation" of black and other athletes. Plus he has taken on Bill Cosby, among others.)

Much of the debate about Watkins has focused on topics that may not appear directly related to his academic discipline (finance). But he notes that he has published finance articles in traditional journals and that his public intellectual role also includes a blog and a book in which he addresses finance issues for a multicultural and not necessarily wealthy audience.

"My colleagues are good people, but they hate me for being different," Watkins said. He noted that universities like Syracuse usually cheer when their professors turn up on CNN and other national media forums. In particular he noted that Cantor, the chancellor at Syracuse, has called for professors to engage in "scholarship in action," in which they focus on community problems and resist ivory tower elitism. "The chancellor has been calling for this. She writes op-eds about this. I do it, and I don't get tenure," he said. "The rules of academia change when you are part of a powerless group."

Kevin Morrow, a spokesman for the university, said that it is Syracuse policy not to discuss individual tenure cases. In general, he said that the university supported "a thorough, multi-level process involving the faculty member’s department and school/college and concluding with a decision made at the institutional (university) level. The candidate is considered for his or her record of accomplishment and potential to continue to make high-quality and valuable contributions in teaching, scholarship and service."

Morrow said that Syracuse's faculty includes many successful non-white academics. The university has 90 black tenured faculty members and 78 tenured faculty members who are members of other minority groups. The university also has another 20 tenure-track faculty members who are black and 38 who are members of other ethnic groups. He also noted that three Syracuse colleges -- which together enroll more than half of all students at the university -- have black deans.

As for the statement that the university issued about Watkins and the O'Reilly controversy, Morrow said that it was not an attempt by the university to deny Watkins his rights, but just the opposite. "This was done to protect Professor Watkins’ right to express his personal opinion," Morrow said. "We would do the same -- and in fact have done the same -- for other professors with whom members of the public take issue due to the opinions they have expressed."

Morrow said that in such cases, "our response involves upholding the specific faculty member's right to present his or her personal opinion, with the understanding that the opinion expressed is that of the individual, not necessarily the university."

Eric Spina, vice chancellor and provost, followed Morrow's statement with one of his own: "Syracuse University has a very robust set of evaluation standards for granting tenure, including providing candidates multiple paths depending upon their particular scholarly modality and approach. As provost, I always make it my personal responsibility — irrespective of the work of any committee — to assess a tenure candidate through the lens that best supports their scholarly approach. I fully and thoroughly evaluated Professor Watkins' work in this way, but at the end of the day it did not meet our standards."

While Watkins may be outside the mainstream of public debate on some issues (and is proud of being so), his supporters say that's precisely why he deserves the platform of a university position and the security of tenure. His blog, The People's Scholar, is filling up with postings from supporters demanding that Syracuse grant him tenure.

Juan Gilbert, an associate professor of computer science, is president of the Brothers of the Academy, a group of black male academics, and he counts himself as a Watkins supporter even if they don't agree on all issues.

"I have reviewed Boyce's credentials and I find it hard to believe that he was denied tenure on the basis of his scholarship," Gilbert said. "I believe tenure and promotion is about a scholar's impact," he said, noting that his following among black people and regular media appearances show that there are few people with the ability to get attention to views that "represent a truth that is shared by millions of Americans." When Bill Cosby suggested black parents were spending too much money on sneakers, Watkins explained why that might be the case to many people who have no idea what it means to be a black parent in poverty, Gilbert said.

While Gilbert said he wasn't endorsing the views of Watkins, he said the debate needs that perspective. "I don't think you should judge Boyce's scholarship by whether you agree with him or not. You need to judge him by the impact of his scholarship and from my view, the impact is loud and clear."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Did Bill O'Reilly Doom a Tenure Bid?

  • Watkins Controversy
  • Posted by Dan , Reader at None on May 18, 2009 at 6:30am EDT
  • Professor Cihon had it right: "Blow hards"... both O'Reilly and Watkins

  • Posted by bystander , Ph. D. on May 18, 2009 at 7:00am EDT
  • Your headline is misleading. Bill O'Reilly did not sink anyone's tenure. He might want to, if he could, but that is another story. This young man was tempted by an opportunity for fame. He spoke to Bill O'Reilly's big audience in an intemperate fashion using vocabulary which seemed unscholarly to his colleagues at Syracuse--to the extent that they said no to his tenure application. I find his vocabulary unscholarly myself ("happy Negro"?) and so forth--about Juan Williams? Yes, Bill O'Reilly showed ignorance, but at least he admitted he had been wrong and had learned something, and maybe this young man should have invited him over for supper himself to teach him there is more to black culture than rage. This tenure candidate showed poor judgment and sunk his own boat. The O'Reilly dialogue was an opportunity, but he misused the chance and it became his own undoing.

  • Another clown whines.....
  • Posted by Ho Humm on May 18, 2009 at 7:00am EDT
  • Boyce Watkins doesn't get tenure because of whatever and now he whines racism.... what a load! When conservatives don't get hired in academia, lefties say it's because conservatives aren't as smart as liberals.... maybe Watkins didn't get tenure because he is not as smart as the people who did....

  • Shocking
  • Posted by bevo on May 18, 2009 at 7:30am EDT
  • By Watkins' admission that his behavior did not conform to the department's expected behavior of junior faculty, he was denied tenure. A person was fired because he or she did not conform to the organization's norms? Shocking! Never happens everyday of the work week.

    Watkins should spend a lot less time with his Finance hommies and chill with the fellas from Management.

    Pity for Watkins that no one told him that junior faculty are to be seen (writing articles for A+ journals) and not heard (on television).

  • Watkins Tenure
  • Posted by Diogenes on May 18, 2009 at 8:15am EDT
  • Mr. Watkins should have realized that untenured professors are not protected by the Bill of Rights

  • whoa...
  • Posted by Kate on May 18, 2009 at 8:15am EDT
  • bystander, when you say "young man" about this PhD'ed and otherwise accomplished University Professor (who doesn't seem particularly young to be going for tenure), I can't help thinking that you might mean "boy".
    Watkins may or may not be "playing the race card" by blaming his opinions on race for his tenure denial, but it seems pretty clear by this article and by the comments to it that it's also pretty dangerous for a professor who isn't already protected by tenure to express unpopular or controversial opinions about race.
    I wonder if O'Reily realizes that he's made a strong argument in favor of tenure.
    The swiftness with which everyone is determined to condemn Watkins is disappointing to me. I would have expected better than knee-jerk racial stereotypes and white-privelaged outrage from readers of an academic blog.

  • Double Standards
  • Posted by Shirley J on May 18, 2009 at 8:30am EDT
  • This controversy is evidence of the racial divide in this country. Professor Watkins simply articulated what many in the black community believe about Juan Williams. I don't know if the word "happy" is accurate, but the word "Negro" has a specific connotation that whites may not understand. It's like calling someone a "House Negro," a person who has the favor of the slave master and who lives in relative comfort, compared with the field slaves. Williams' conservatism is well-known. In the 1980s, I remember when he used to write articles in Washington, DC, where his sources were clearly individuals within the Reagan Administration. Williams has not changed.

    To deny a vocal professor tenure because the University fears the displeasure of Fox News is abhorrent. Bill O'Reilly, an ignorant racist, should not be encouraged in his obvious misuse of the media to advance his backwards positions on race.

  • Don't cry for Boyce, Argentina
  • Posted by Carl , Small cog/Big Wheel at Bloated MegaU on May 18, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • It is publish or perish in high-end academia. Here's the most recent pub listed on Mr. Watkins' Syracuse web-site:

    On Government Programs that Increase Small Firms' Access to Capital
    Boyce D Watkins
    Journal of Small Business Management.
    Milwaukee: Jan 2007.
    Vol. 45, Iss. 1; pg. 133, 4 pgs

    Abstract

    This comment addresses two interesting research projects in the field of entrepreneurship. The papers under discussion are Bradford (this issue) and Craig, Jackson, and Thomson (this issue). Both of these papers represent strong and effective research inquiries into important areas of small business development.

    IMHO, not exactly earth-shattering in its insight. Nor in the specific field of finance.

    If Mr. Watkins has any authentic finance skills, he can still make a surgeon's salary. Don't cry for Boyce Watkins, Argentina. He just has to work summers and 8 to 5, M-F.

    Why he did not get tenure is reflected when he looks in the mirror. Not anyone or anywhere else.

    BTW: Mr. O'Reilly regularly has African-American scholars on his show, who have opposing views to BoR.

    Fox TV News gives more airtime to Democrats, Bernard Sanders, et. al, because it is talk-oriented -- which costs less than street reporters. That broadband presentation, as opposed to your typical, politically-myopic public liberal arts classroom.

    Yeah, yeah, I know. Facts are racist, sexist, homophobic, and hurtful. Cry me a river.

  • Evidence?
  • Posted by georgia , Writing program coordinator at University of Tennessee Thornton Center on May 18, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • Ho Humm, can you provide evidence of liberals having claimed that conservative candidates were denied tenure because they're "not smart enough"? I'd be interested in reading any articles, news reports, etc. that give evidence of such.

  • More deliberation needed
  • Posted by Syracuse BA, Class of 2003 , PhD Candidate at Northwestern University on May 18, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • As is often the case when a tenure decision comes under the media spotlight, this is now a difficult situation to see clearly. As a Syracuse alum, I'd like Professor Watkins to have commented with more restraint, particularly when he found himself baited by Bill O'Reilly. At the same time, the university ought to have done more to protect its junior faculty from reprobation during the tenure evaluation.

    Finally, as a PhD candidate, nothing discourages me about the profession more than the shrill accusations and breathless innuendo of some of the comments above. It's clear that no one has all the facts. Why the rush to judgment? Feeding this fire will only create another media sensation like Ward Churchill's. That will reflect poorly on all involved: Professor Watkins, Syracuse University, and the profession generally.

  • What exactly is Watkins' research record?
  • Posted by concerned scholar , professor of social sciences at public U. in southeast on May 18, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • Unless Syracuse has substantially more relaxed tenure requirements than do most research universities, Watkins' tenure decision should rely primarily on the quality of his research program. Watkins lists his research publications on his blog: http://boycewatkins.net/research.htm I'd urge those of you writing to defend him to look it over and ask yourself whether he would should tenure based on that record.

  • What else do you expect from Syracuse?
  • Posted by james on May 18, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • I encourage all of you who think that Watkins is out of line to realize that Syracuse also mistreated many other outspoken African Americans in the past.  Watkins has many fans and supporters and I am one of them.  He was also the only black man on earth to get a PhD in finance in the year 2002, an achievement I am sure most of you could not replicate.

    It's too bad that whites don't understand when they are simply repeating history. America is a country that is racially twisted, and you guys just don't get it.  Keep sitting in your little offices writing work that no one will ever read, the world doesn't need you. 

  • When most whites are blissfully ignorant
  • Posted by Kirk , Higher Education at Syracuse University on May 18, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • Tenure is a difficult process. I haven't been through it yet, but I hear that if you don't fit the culture of your department, no matter how wrong-headed that culture might be, you won't get tenure.

    Finance strikes me as a field where racism is relatively strong. Kudos to Dr. Watkins for pushing out the very narrow margins for Black intellectuals in finance. But after taking courses at SU in many different departments, I'm not surprised someone trying to address racism is having difficulty gaining tenure there, regardless of public controversy. I find that fields such as economics and finance seem to follow different logic systems that don't allow for the kind of self-critical theory outlined above. I should be clear - I've never taken courses in Finance, only graduate courses, and those have included Economics, not Finance.

    I hope most of those who comment will consider that one of the theories of how racism works is that it encourages people to follow certain publicly-defined lines of reasoning/behavior (sometimes called "scripts"). This is one way that racism, which is systemic, insinuates itself into the system. One such script for Black persons who often receive support from the white establishment is the "happy" or "household" Ne--o. This script involves affirming the happy conditions of Blacks in limited positions. It is not that Watkins called Williams a name, but that Watkins showed how Williams was following a certain script. White people ignorant of how racism works - which is a very privileged position in itself, since Black people certainly can't afford to be ignorant of how racism works - might then respond defensively to the "unmasking" of how some Black persons are in such a limited position they feel the best option is to affirm their happiness despite inequality. The term Watkins used does not insult Williams, but attacks the system which puts Williams in such a position for the benefit of others.

    What I find interesting is that almost everyone in academia likes to say "racism is systemic," but whenever someone points out a specific way racism is present in the system (which is what "systemic" means), white persons take great offense. You can't have it both ways; either racism is systemic, or you must deny racism exists - an untenable position, given the figures in education, economics, and yes, finance.

    Finally, I find Watkin's comments to be admirable, and am proud to be at the same institution. And I am white - rural white!

    Kirk

  • Scared S**tless
  • Posted by Lauren on May 18, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • As an African-American woman currently pursuing my doctorate at a prestigious institution, the comments to this article scare me more than the article itself. I can't believe so many things:

    1. That anyone - conservative or liberal - would defend the Bill O'Reilly's ignorant comments about , Sylvia's (a New York institution), or his subsequent "attempts" to apologize. Really...giving airtime to Juan Williams is his way of saying "I'm not racist?" Come on.

    2. That Carl would think that O'Reilly really listens to the African-American scholars he has on his show, and doesn't just yell over them and end up sticking to his own point of view.

    3. That all Syracuse and the commenters here are focusing on is the "happy Negro" comment and not Watkins' brilliant response to O'Reilly. Why aren't we talking about the truth of Watkins' statement? Could it be that the majority of academia - liberal or conservative - secretly think the same thing as O'Reilly? Perhaps they, too, are shocked when a student of color in their classroom is actually articulate and writes well?

    4. That a huge, established institution like Syracuse (one that just hosted the Vice President) could be so frightened by the comments of an untenured professor that they would issue a press release. And then have the "racial stats" ready when questioned about Watkins' denial of tenure. Any responsible researcher knows that those numbers mean little unless placed in the context of the number of total tenured faculty. Why wasn't that statistic provided?

    5. That Watkins has been called a "clown," a whiner, and his colleagues referred to as "hommies" in these comments.

    Granted, Watkins clearly does not conform to our stereotype of the contented professor. But that gives no one the right to deny him respect and make him the target of people's sublimated racism. Whether or not he deserved tenure, the pure cowardice of Syracuse and the ignorant malevolence in these comments shocks and saddens me.

  • Thank you, Kirk
  • Posted by Lauren on May 18, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • Your comment was thought-provoking and calm, a wonderful respite. Thank you. By the way, just as Black people should not have to qualify their "Blackness," neither should you have to qualify your Whiteness.

  • An opportunity for education
  • Posted by james on May 18, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • Given the challenges that other black leaders have had to go through in order to educate whites, I see this as nothing but history in the making.  If you look in the past, most progressive black scholars had a hard time getting tenure.  Cornel West was almost kicked out of Harvard for working with the black community and in spite of the fact that he is one of the most respected scholars in the world, there are many scholars who don't consider him to be legitimate. 

    It is not out of the question that there was some jealousy involved or that people simply felt that Watkins was acting "inappropriate".  But he is a black man in an environment dominated by whites, so that is likely going to be the case anyway.  Whites like to say that the evaluations are always fair, but they neglect to think carefully about how their "fair" evaluations unfairly impact specific ethnic groups.  If you want to believe that personal feelings don't impact the tenure process, then you've never seen academia up close.  As an administrator, I have. 

  • Drop the crypto-
  • Posted by Jo , Crypto-anarchist at Boring Public U on May 18, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • " .. the ignorant malevolence in these comments shocks and saddens me."

    I'm convinced. No standards are applicable. Anarchy is the only logical outcome -- no more crypto-anarchy.

  • Research record is in line with others in his dept
  • Posted by Jerry on May 18, 2009 at 10:15am EDT
  • I looked at the web pages for Watkins and for other profs in the finance dept. at Syracuse. Profs list a selection of their articles, presumably their best. Most faculty are publishing, almost no publications in premier finance journals (e.g., those on Financial Times list), and generally moderately productive but they aren't that prolific. Watkins' research record includes few journals that are pretty good, though not premier, and he has a decent number of articles in a couple of core areas, without relying on long lists of co-authors to pump up his numbers. Based on research, he should probably get tenure there. I think a lot of schools would be happy to have someone who is productive and engaged like Watkins is.

  • Not my Homies
  • Posted by Hoosier Prof on May 18, 2009 at 10:30am EDT
  • I'm with Kirk and Lauren: many of these comments disgust me and don't represent my POV. But I am also troubled by something else I have observed in IHE's stories on tenure cases. Why do we ignorant bystanders feel the need to weigh in on the tenure decision with incomplete information? Anybody who has sat on a P&T committee, or put together a dossier, knows that there is a good reason that the only individuals who get to vote are those who have seen a candidate's entire dossier. I have not seen Watkins's dossier, so I will not pass judgement on him OR his colleagues. Syracuse has due process like every other institution. Let Watkins pursue it.

  • Not to worry, folks.......
  • Posted by Innocent By-Stander on May 18, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • Let's remember that the professor brought race into the discussion. No doubt Princeton will offer him a position.

  • What country am I in?
  • Posted by Clare on May 18, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • This is the "land of the free" yet commenters are getting their knickers in a twist about Watkins not behaving with the appropriate "decorum" required for an academic. Aside from the racist dog-whistle in such remarks, since when were academics expected to behave like upper-class characters from 19th novels? I sometimes wonder if the relentless concern with the legal implications of the first amendment overwhelm a committment to the its spirit. Are we seriously advocating self-censorship in an academic setting merely so that a person can get tenure? I admit this is good practical advice, but as a point of principle it stinks.

  • Posted by intimidated? hardly. on May 18, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • Lauren: you must be remarkably credulous if you find it hard to believe that someone who beclowns himself is called a clown.

  • Attack the latest person with an actual voice ...
  • Posted by DFS on May 18, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • Here's our flavor of the day: "being attacked by Bill O'Reilly might be a badge of honor."

    Then there is the usual response by Diogenes: "untenured professors are not protected by the Bill of Rights," as the first salvo. 'We can say whatever we want,' and we'll just wrap it up in 'this Bill.' BTW, this Bill applies to no one else, because
    We're Special.

    Kate is right -- there are still plenty of people who still think in terms of "Boy," and they are on the LEFT.

    Shirley avers that "Happy Negro" is okay if said by a Black person, but God forbid if the Right speaks with the same tongue, openly. Of course, if you're on the right, you have no such right. Speaking undercover is okay, though, as long as we can be loud enough about the necessary hair-splitting. Nevermind that Juan Williams is an honorable MAN and that he is correct.

    And, Georgia, just swallow your bile and visit frontpagemag.com, specifically discoverthenetworks.org, to finally realize your impending epiphany. But, do it in private, preferably from some internet cafe, perhaps, lest your colleages investigate YOU and subsequently get rid of you.

    Finally, James, where is your documentation? Just throw bombs? You assert something, and of course Scott through IHE placidly relays it, but there is no evidence given for it. You, sir, are just in search of an audience of mere students, not those actually well-read people resisting your crap.

    And, James, that's right: if we just keep looking in the past, instead of what's reality, we'll always conform to your world view.

  • What's his research record?
  • Posted by Vita Man on May 18, 2009 at 12:00pm EDT
  • It's become trite for faculty who are denied tenure or promotion to claim that the levels of review were biased against them. What is this fellow's research record? His blog is uninformative and I can't find a c.v. link, although his blog is full of links and even screenshots of appearances on TV. He seems to have several books directed to the public, possibly self-published(?), and a number of published articles described as "solo authored" (sic). What is the reputation of these outlets, e.g "Stock Option Watch"?

    His blog claims that: "Dr Boyce Watkins is one of the leading financial experts and social commentators in the world."  

  • Posted by Phred at land grant u on May 18, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • DFS, " "being attacked by Bill O'Reilly might be a badge of honor" because O'Reilly is a bully not because he is a right-winger. The man cannot admit he might be wrong and stalking a chancellor and demanding that university apologize for the actions of one its professors is the act of a Jerry Springer. The chancellor behaved inappropriately by not telling O'Reilly something to the effect that Watkins behavior was bad only because he got down in the mud with O'Reilly. As for Watkins, he should be able to get a job somewhere decent, if his publications are as Jerry says they are.

  • Protecting Controversial Remarks
  • Posted by Traditional Prof. on May 18, 2009 at 3:15pm EDT
  • O'Reilly's website criticizes Watkins for race-baiting, attacking another TV commentator in racial terms, and for extreme statements such as that O'Reilly wants to lynch Michelle Obama. These complaints are on O'Reilly's website, linked above.

    As a faculty member I believe that even such insulting and absurd statements should be protected by absolute academic freedom. I'd like to see that other faculty who make racial remarks also receive such protection, rather than being investigated by campus committees on "racial sensitivity" and "hostile environment." 

    Academic freedom is a right, but receiving tenure is not. Thus, if his hostile comments and attitude are considered as part of the process deciding whether to make him a permanent member of the campus community, that too is appropriate within traditional academic standards.

  • Whoa.
  • Posted by Carl on May 18, 2009 at 4:30pm EDT
  • http://drboycemoney.com

    " .. Dr Boyce Watkins is one of the leading financial experts and social commentators in the world."

    Just a minute. The kind of person who claims that? Bernard Madoff. The Enron boys. The Harvard crowd involved with Fannie/Freddie.

    The key comparison between Mr. Watkins and Fake Indian Ward-o: where were their chairpersons? Deans? Provost? To tell them to "get real?"

    That kind of claim is just flat-out wrong, wrong, wrong.

  • Obsession with race
  • Posted by Andrew on May 18, 2009 at 6:45pm EDT
  • As a South African academic, I am dismayed and deeply disappointed with your obsession with race. Grow up already! We had dared to hope that your recent democratic, non-racial elections demonstrated American maturity in the 21st century. Seems we were wrong.

  • Public intellectuals
  • Posted by Kathleen Lowrey at University of Alberta on May 18, 2009 at 7:30pm EDT
  • Dean Joel Kaplan is right -- the fact that Syracuse *issued an official statement* about Dr. Watkins' public appearances (but those of no other professors) speaks volumes.  How shameful.   

  • redux
  • Posted by bystander , note to Kate on May 18, 2009 at 8:15pm EDT
  • I am 66, and to me, this candidate for tenure is a "young man." Kind of an impetuous young man I suppose, actually. Maybe to you he doesn't seem so young. My students think they are getting "old" when they turn 21. I would not want to be 21 again, but I don't think 31 is old or all that "mature" either although when I was thirty, I thought so at the time. He is a young man with much to learn.

    When one becomes sixty-six, one thinks of people in their thirties as young. I KNOW the old insults of calling all men of color--older than I am--"boy." If I had wanted to be rude and insulting, I know how. I did not. I do not. Please consider all ideas. This is a scholarly forum, not a playground.

  • Is it racist to defend a controversial speaker?
  • Posted by Thales on May 18, 2009 at 10:15pm EDT
  • Syracuse issued a statement distancing itself and defending Watkins' right to speak, but doesn't typically do so. Guess why? No, not because of race -- because most speakers aren't controversial. In fact, most are never heard about beyond the small audience.

    Now, does Notre Dame issue statements to defend its choice of EVERY commencement speaker? If not, figure out why they did this time. (No, again not race -- try the other reason).

  • Amazing
  • Posted by Tracy on May 18, 2009 at 10:15pm EDT
  • Syracuse really shot themselves in the butt with this one. They should have just given this guy tenure or paid him to leave. Whether they like it or not, black people are following him and in huge numbers. Has anyone ever seen how many comments he gets on his blog? Also, his eblast lists are all over the place, so he has more reach than Cantor or anyone else has. I am not sure what kind of traditional scholar he is, but it is clear that he has touched millions of people in ways that no one at Syracuse has ever done. That seems to fit the criteria for their scholarship in action campaign. We can't just ignore his scholarship in action just because it influences black people. If he had the same following among whites, he'd be hailed as a hero.

  • Professor Watkins
  • Posted by Lance , Associate Professor at Columbia University on May 19, 2009 at 4:45am EDT
  • Professor Watkins successfully engages in the popular media. His commentary is often thought provoking. I enjoy listening to him and reading his blog. I would not be surprised if Syracuse University were tainted by the stain of racism.

    That said, the name of the game in research institutions is publish in peer reviewed outlets or perish. Someone should have advised him to make sure he had a substantial record of peer reviewed publications. It does not appear that he had that many. His interaction with the popular media does not count. One could argue that it should count. But I know of few research institutions where popular writing/commentary counts toward tenure. Moreover, a field like finance provides plenty of opportunity for real world commentary. I also don't think it's the case that no one reads finance journals. Peep this link for example of the influence of finance articles:
    http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-03/wp_quant?currentPage=all

    We are in the midst of a historic financial calamity. Bloggers like Paul Krugman, Brad Delong and Simon Johnson combine public commentary with scholarly publishing.

    The fact that Professor Watkins is outspoken and controversial is all the more reason to make sure that he had his publication record in order.

    I think a tenured position would have been a nice platoform from which to voice his opinion. I hope we are still able to hear from him.

  • ebony or ivory, it's still a tower
  • Posted by aghast and agog on May 19, 2009 at 5:00am EDT
  • Uninformed assumptions and front loaded judgments are flying on both sides of this argument, but mostly on the side of defending Mr. Watkins. I'm surprised by the bias being thrown around here.

    Tenure!? No other profession that I know of comes with the luxury of a lifetime guarantee. Tenure itself is a questionable and understandably dwindling privilege, and those denied will have their grievances. Presumably Mr. Watkins will have recourse to appropriate channels of appeal or protest, not to mention other job offers. So he didn't make the cut. The University's interests and statements seem rather straight forward. It's business, not race. We would need more evidence to prove institutionalized racism in this particular venue. Assuming that race is "the reason" for a complex process is itself racist, no matter the color of the accuser. 

    And yes, Bill O'Reilly is a blowhard bully. 

  • Why don't we fix it?
  • Posted by Monique on May 19, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • There are numerous studies stating that the ivory tower is really screwed up.  One article after another in both academic journals and the popular press argue that professors and their narrow minded perspectives are becoming obsolete.  I got a phd and it was sad when my chairman told me that rather than reaching out across disciplines, I should focus on one tiny, irrelevant niche.  This is not how the world works.

    I applaud this man's work because he knows that solving the critical problems of our world are not going to happen in a stuffy academic journal.  They are not going to be solved by analyzing the intricate details of some tiny niche.  In fact, this is the reason that our financial system is in the state it's in, since most of these financial models were built by academics who do not understand the real world. We need a new version of academia. 

    The Syracuse president had a good idea with her scholarship in action campaign.  But if you call for public scholarship and then deny tenure to one of the leading black public scholars in the world, it makes you look like a fool and it makes your program look like propaganda. 

  • Boyce Watkins publication record
  • Posted by Lance , Associate Professor at Columbia University on May 19, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • On another site the below articles are listed for his publication record. I can attest to the quality of these journals but he appears to be rather productive.

    “The economic and predictive value of trading volume growth: a tale of 3 moments” Applied Financial Economics, forthcoming. (solo-authored)

    Du, Ding and Boyce Watkins, “When competing hypotheses really don’t compete: A first look at time-variation in cross-autocorrelations” The Journal of Economics and Business, Volume 59, Issue 2, March-April 2007, Pages 130-143

     

    "Do emerging markets with consistent returns have better future performance?", Quantitative Finance, Volume 6 (5), October, 2006. (solo-authored)

     

    "Institutional ownership and return reversals following short-term return consistency” The Financial Review, Volume 41(3), August 2006(solo-authored)

     

    “On Government Programs that Increase Small Firms' Access to Capital” The Journal of Small Business Management, Volume 45(1), January 2007 (Solo-authored)

     

    “Riding the Wave of Sentiment: An Analysis of Return Consistency as a Predictor of Future Returns” The Journal of Behavioral Finance, Volume 4(4), 2003 (Solo-authored)

     

    “Stock options and the Sarbanes – Oxley Act of 2002” Stock Option Watch, August, 2006. (solo-authored)

     

    “Can hybrid fund managers predict changes in aggregate liquidity?” Investment Management and Financial Innovations, Issue 3, 2004. (solo-authored)

    “Stock Options and the use of inside information”, Stock Option Watch 6 (December, 2005 – solo authored)

  • Lauren
  • Posted by Frank , JUST A READER at USA on May 20, 2009 at 5:45am EDT
  • What a great comment you have made

  • REALITY CHECK
  • Posted by MM on May 20, 2009 at 3:30pm EDT
  • The fact that so many people focus on his media comments and not his scholarly record is the point! The tenure process is inherently political. If anyone says that it is just about “the record”, then they are blissfully ignorant. Congratulations. I was told what standards to meet. I jumped the hoops and met them. I was tenured. Then two years later, I faced intimidation, manipulation, & retaliation because I refused to support someone who didn’t have to jump through ANY hoops. She had no publications. This was her FIRST faculty appointment. She was applying 4 years early (yeah, you heard me!). She only went to conferences with her husband (distinguished in another field). And, she lied in her tenure packet. And none of this is denied by the department chair. He just makes illogical excuses of why she is special. The new faculty are completely confused about the standard, and I’m persona non grata. After initially supporting her, the Dean asked her to withdraw her application. The department has never been the same since. And now I know how little my Chair and Dean value me.

  • Amen Kirk & Lauren! And Be Kind & Informed People!
  • Posted by Graduate Student Kai on June 1, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • "This young man was tempted by an opportunity for fame. He spoke to Bill O'Reilly's big audience in an intemperate fashion using vocabulary which seemed unscholarly to his colleagues at Syracuse--to the extent that they said no to his tenure application."

    Comments like these at a website/publication for folks in higher education are more than unsettling, they're downright depressing. And one of the first few called him a Clown!

    If race was not any sort of factor here, then the first instinct of these two posters would not have been to devolve to racially hostile language!
    I am not saying anything new or anything that Kirk and Lauren didn't say much more clearly above. But I had to contribute my affective response in support of those two voices at least! To beg for a bit more tolerance and kindness with regards to hostilities thrown around on what seems to be just a random posting board, but which substitutes as our modern day public square.
    Be as respectful as you would be sitting across from someone at the local diner.

  • Posted by Anon Coward on June 4, 2009 at 11:45am EDT
  • As a long time follower of Watkins contributions to BlackProf I'd be interested if someone in the finance field could comment on the above pub record. I'd also like to share my opinion that he is controversial. Definitely a person best read in context.

    I'd like to see him succeed due to the perspective he brings but if he wasn't playing the tenure game I'd prefer to see him succeed in a way that better matches his contributions.

  • To Andrew from South Africa
  • Posted by madinirose on June 4, 2009 at 4:45pm EDT
  • I would like to remind you that South Africa just ended apartheid 15 years ago and you want us to believe that your country has completely gotten over racism? From what I've observed when I visited South Africa last year, there is still racial tension and it's worst than it is in America. In South Africa, blacks and whites don't even talk to each other in social situations and you want to say to me that it's only my country is obsessed with race. Well, maybe we are having a much needed discussion about it. And this discussion is necessarily in Johannesburg as well. Just having a black president doesn't hide the fact that most of wealth and resources of your country lie with the white minority (not the black majority).

  • My $0.02
  • Posted by The Unknown Professor on June 5, 2009 at 5:30am EDT
  • Boyce's record is all right, but nothing exceptional (note: I'm an assistant finance professor at a small research university, so I'm familiar with most of the journals he's published in). He has one publication in Financial Review (a "second tier" general finance journal) and one in the Journal of Behavioral Finance (also a second tier journal, but a newer one geared to a specialized sub-discipline). They're both sole-authored, so that speaks in his favor. The other pubs are mostly in lower-tier journals.

    In contrast, most of the tenured faculty have at least one publication in either a first-tier journal or a couple in what I'd call "mezzanine" journals (not top-tier, but the best of the rest). So, he's clearly not a star in terms of research output. In addition, Syracuse has a small doctoral program, so the faculty there are expected to publish in good journals.

    Unfortunately, a junior faculty will usually have to be at least as good as the average tenured faculty in order to be "clearly" tenurable. If not, it comes down to "soft" factors (call it "collegiality", "politics", "intangibles" or whatever,

    My guess is that a junior faculty with his level of visibility will ruffle feathers. Add a couple of controversial statements or positions into the mix, and I'm not surprised he didn't get tenure. I'm not saying that it's a fair decision, just that it's not surprising.