Conservative op/ed columnist Jacques misinterpreted Stanford's 'woke' policy
Conservative journalist Ingrid Jacques has used her considerable reach as a columnist with USA Today (Jan. 8) to attempt to sow fear and concern that, “As wokeness pervades our society, expect to see a lot more limits placed on our daily word choices.” My first thought was what words has she or any of us been prevented from using in our daily life? She cites a memo at Stanford University and then proceeds to extrapolate and seems to suggest that this is “political correctness gone wild” that will soon limit hers and everyone else’s daily communication.
Steve Gallagher, Chief Information Officer at Stanford University has addressed the concerns about the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative (EHLI) at least two times (it took me about 30 seconds of internet searching to turn this up.) In part, he addresses that this was created for the IT community and was seen as a guide not a mandate. In fact, he very clearly stated that the term “American” is “not banned at Stanford, it is absolutely welcomed.” (Do a quick search yourself to read both of his comments.)
But that information doesn’t serve when a conservative writer wants to make people afraid of others. This is another manufactured bogey man to scare people. Education, awareness and thoughtfulness are not enemies of the people! When I was coming up, instead of the word "woke,” we used words like thoughtful, considerate and sensitive to others. What a shame that those values are looked down on by some people these days.
Joe Pascale, Cathedral City
Perhaps Ms. Jacques was looking to shame Stanford for 'wokeism'
The Jan. 8 commentary on the list of "Harmful Language:" This list was never issued by Stanford University. It was the product of the CIO and the IT department at Stanford and was specifically intended as guidance for those writing for the University website, not for students or faculty. This guide was to attempt to avoid questionable terminology in the public face of the school. This was clearly stated by a press release on Dec. 20.
Perhaps Ms. Jacques didn't bother looking into the story. Perhaps she was looking to shame Stanford for "wokeism." Whether it was laziness or intent, it looked like an unfair attack that was outdated well before its publication.
Keith Oberman, Indio
This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Stanford 'wokeism' was misrepresented by column 'Harmful Language'
