University Of North Carolina Pulls Back On Offer To Controversial Author Of NYT ‘1619 Project’

Much of the nation’s ongoing racial tension can be attributed to New York Times opinion writer Nikole Hannah-Jones and her disciples.

Hannah-Jones, who is black, spearheaded the Times’ “1619 Project” which won a Pulitzer Prize last year for arguing that America’s founding was rooted in racism and slavery and should be properly dated to 1619, when the first African slaves were brought to our shores, and not 1776, when the nation actually cast off British rule.

Hannah-Jones was celebrated, the Biden administration now wants her musings taught in America’s schools, and advocates of the project greeted it as if nothing had changed in America in the past 400 years.

Real historians, however, denounced her for a significant and misleading misreading of American history and for demonstrable errors, which the Times quietly corrected.

Even Hannah-Jones herself later reversed course and began saying the project was a work of journalism and not actual history.

The University of North Carolina was prepared to recognize that latter fact.

According to the conservative group Campus Reform, UNC offered Hannah-Jones, a UNC alumnus, $180,000 a year over the next five years for a tenured chairmanship on the faculty. She would have been the Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism – which undoubtedly would have provided her a perch to promote more woke theories about America’s history and society and spread that through the student body.

And as a tenured professor, Hannah-Jones would have been protected from any adverse professional action for her opinions. 

But that now has apparently been with yanked.

UNC pulled back on its offer, according to Campus Reform, after conservatives pushed back on her hiring. They pressured the school and politicians about giving Hannah-Jones immediate tenure and pointing out the checkered history of her work.

Hannah-Jones will now apparently be given the chance to teach at UNC for a five-year contract, at the end of which she could receive tenure. 

Be prepared to hear this is just more racism.

One of Hannah-Jones’s supporters at UNC noted, “This is kind of cancel culture at its finest.”

Sure, except for the fact that, unlike real victims of Cancel Culture who lose jobs by speaking out against the ideology Hannah-Jones advocates, Hannah-Jones did not lose the teaching gig. She just had to wait a few years to reach a point where she could not be fired.

That Hannah-Jones supporter was obviously oblivious to Hannah-Jones’ own efforts to cancel two of her former NYT colleagues: opinions editor James Bennet, who stepped down last year amid criticism from Hannah-Jones and others after allowing GOP Sen. Tom Cotton to write an op-ed critical of Black Lives Matter rioting, and science reporter Donald McNeil, who resigned in February after reportedly using the N-word in a 2019 conversation with a student who had asked whether another student should be punished for using it in an online video.

Check out the ‘Cancel Corner‘, a new section launched where we report on the latest Cancel Cases and stories from around the globe.

Support journalism by clicking here to our gofundme or sign up for our free newsletter by clicking here

Android Users, Click Here To Download The Free Press App And Never Miss A Story. It’s Free And Coming To Apple Users Soon.


Login To Facebook From Your Browser To Leave A Comment

One Reply to “University Of North Carolina Pulls Back On Offer To Controversial Author Of NYT ‘1619 Project’”

  1. What a garbage “article.” No sources or “real historians” cited. “Real historians” — which ones, precisely? Where did they make the claims this garbage author suggests they did? Does the author here refer to the criticisms levied against Hannah-Jones by Gordon Wood and Leslie Harris? If so, what does “real historian” really mean here? The author of this article apparently doesn’t understand how history writing is done or what it actually is; simultaneously, it appears that the author of this article doesn’t understand how to read things honestly.

    So, a hit piece written by a hack “journalist” who can’t help but editorialize the reporting of Conservative attempts at cancel culture. The hand-waving away of “this doesn’t count as cancel culture” is weak at best and, if nothing else, merely serves to highlight just how much this IS cancel culture. After all, it is patently obvious that the solution Mr. Edgar had hoped for was for Hannah-Jones not to be hired by UNC at all—which directly undermines his virtue signaling of “tHiS iSn’T cAnCeL cUlTUre!!1!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *