Naming of Players

Donate To GopherHole
A

AEmerson40

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
252
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Just read CNN's coverage of the end of the boycott: http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/17/us/minnesota-gophers-end-football-boycott/index.html.

What stuck out to me is this sentence: "The university named the 10 players, but CNN is not naming them because they were not charged with any crimes and it's not clear why they were suspended."

If CNN intentionally abstains from naming the players, why did administrators feel the need to name them? This seems to be a big part of what brought on the boycott. Does anyone have insight into what the administration should have done here?
 

AEmerson40 said:
Just read CNN's coverage of the end of the boycott: http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/17/us/minnesota-gophers-end-football-boycott/index.html.

What stuck out to me is this sentence: "The university named the 10 players, but CNN is not naming them because they were not charged with any crimes and it's not clear why they were suspended."

If CNN intentionally abstains from naming the players, why did administrators feel the need to name them? This seems to be a big part of what brought on the boycott. Does anyone have insight into what the administration should have done here?
Click to expand...
Correct, and now Kaler has made televised comments saying it's good to support the teammates but they looked like they were supporting sexual violence...backing the university into a corner.


Complete mismanagement of this whole thing by administration.
Any commentary about sexual violence in relation to suspended players is potentially going to cost the university money via litigation.
 

AEmerson40 said:
Just read CNN's coverage of the end of the boycott: http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/17/us/minnesota-gophers-end-football-boycott/index.html.

What stuck out to me is this sentence: "The university named the 10 players, but CNN is not naming them because they were not charged with any crimes and it's not clear why they were suspended."

If CNN intentionally abstains from naming the players, why did administrators feel the need to name them? This seems to be a big part of what brought on the boycott. Does anyone have insight into what the administration should have done here?
Click to expand...

The U had to list the players they were going to suspend.
 

West Fargo Gopher Fan said:
The U had to list the players they were going to suspend.
Click to expand...

And they originally said they can't comment further due to data privacy

Then information started leaking from wherever. And now Kaler on channel 5 commenting about victims of sexual violence in response to questions about suspended players.

Remember when you said you couldn't comment further? You were right, and now you just commented further...opening the U of M up to litigation.
 

Some guy said:
And they originally said they can't comment further due to data privacy

Then information started leaking from wherever. And now Kaler on channel 5 commenting about victims of sexual violence in response to questions about suspended players.

Remember when you said you couldn't comment further? You were right, and now you just commented further...opening the U of M up to litigation.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I was just saying why the U initially had to release the 10 players names
 


Sure hope it's a trail by jury and my name is drawn.
 

Some guy said:
Correct, and now Kaler has made televised comments saying it's good to support the teammates but they looked like they were supporting sexual violence...backing the university into a corner.


Complete mismanagement of this whole thing by administration.
Any commentary about sexual violence in relation to suspended players is potentially going to cost the university money via litigation.
Click to expand...

Why would that cost them any money? He didn't say that the players raped the woman, he said that the boycotting players "looked like they were supporting sexual violence." That seems to be absolutely true based on what I have heard and read as to the general public's view of what this boycott is (or was) about. It may not have been their intent, but that was the perception and Kaler seems clearly to have been discussing perception.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
Why would that cost them any money? He didn't say that the players raped the woman, he said that the boycotting players "looked like they were supporting sexual violence." That seems to be absolutely true based on what I have heard and read as to the general public's view of what this boycott is (or was) about. It may not have been their intent, but that was the perception and Kaler seems clearly to have been discussing perception.
Click to expand...

When he says "that is really what this is about, it is about support for victims."

He is no longer saying the violated unspecified team policy. He is saying they created victims of a sexual crime. Everybody knows who he is talking about. That is a violation of data privacy. He wasn't talking about perception.
 

Some guy said:
When he says "that is really what this is about, it is about support for victims."

He is no longer saying the violated unspecified team policy. He is saying they created victims of a sexual crime. Everybody knows who he is talking about. That is a violation of data privacy. He wasn't talking about perception.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's not the part you referenced in your post. I guess we'll see where the big lawsuit goes and how it comes out, but what I saw was Kaler addressing the fact that the players involved in the boycott made clear in their second statement that they, too, place great importance on supporting the victims of sexual assault. I guess that Woli will be a defendant in the lawsuit, too.
 



2nd Degree Gopher said:
Ok, that's not the part you referenced in your post. I guess we'll see where the big lawsuit goes and how it comes out, but what I saw was Kaler addressing the fact that the players involved in the boycott made clear in their second statement that they, too, place great importance on supporting the victims of sexual assault. I guess that Woli will be a defendant in the lawsuit, too.
Click to expand...
You clearly don't know how data privacy law works. Wolitarski is not bound by law to not release private data about U of M students. Kaler is
 

Some guy said:
You clearly don't know how data privacy law works. Wolitarski is not bound by law to not release private data about U of M students. Kaler is
Click to expand...

We must be looking at different video. The KSTP interview I saw involved Kaler being asked about the end of the boycott and Kaler stating that he was pleased that the statement by the boycotters included the concern expressed for victims of sexual assault. That wasn't a reference to this incident, it was a general statement. He, and they, said "victims'" not "victim." I don't see how you would consider that to be a reference to these students or this incident and, without that, I don't see how it could be disclosure of any private data. My reference to Wolitarski was a joke, I was just pointing out that the language that Kaler used was the same as the language in the statement that he was being asked about.
 





Ozzy&Ray said:
No, legally, they should not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes, legally they can. It would come out in depth chart anyway. It's 2016. People leak and figure things out. It's called investigative reporting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
Ok, that's not the part you referenced in your post. I guess we'll see where the big lawsuit goes and how it comes out, but what I saw was Kaler addressing the fact that the players involved in the boycott made clear in their second statement that they, too, place great importance on supporting the victims of sexual assault. I guess that Woli will be a defendant in the lawsuit, too.
Click to expand...

According to some gopherholers this case is going to be worth MILLIONS. Yeah it will be interesting to see how it turns out.
 

Has any player identified themselves from the report on what A2, A5 etc. I would think the few that had limited knowledge or no contact would make it know where their involvement was at.
 

Gogogopher said:
According to some gopherholers this case is going to be worth MILLIONS. Yeah it will be interesting to see how it turns out.
Click to expand...

It will be an all time duck fart, as much teeth as AJ Barker's mom's friend.
 

Gogogopher said:
According to some gopherholers this case is going to be worth MILLIONS. Yeah it will be interesting to see how it turns out.
Click to expand...

We'll see how they do trying to sue a federally supported process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom