Major Newspaper Doesn't Use the Term Redskins for Washington's NFL Team Because It's a Racial Epithet
On September 24, The Kansas City Star's Public Editor Derek Donovan posted a statement on KanasCity.com, the paper's website, regarding the Star's policy to avoid using the term redskins because it's a racial epithet. In his post "Star policy on Washington NFL team's name," Donovan writes: "I remain unconvinced by every argument I've ever heard that the name is not a racial epithet, plain and simple. And I'll even break my usual rule about commenting on issues outside The Star's journalism to say that I find it inconceivable that the NFL still allows such a patently offensive name and mascot to represent the league in 2012." It seems the paper has adhered to the policy reasonably well. Deadpsin.com writer Isaac Rauch reports that "A search for Redskins on Kansascity.com ... turns up about 150 results. For comparison's sake, the same search on nytimes.com turns up about 55,000. If you look at websites owned by papers that cover other AFC teams, like cleveland.com—the website of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer—or denverpost.com, you'll find about 5200 and 2050, respectively. Some of the results on the Star's website seem to be from wire services." Not addressed by Donovan is the use of the nickname "Chiefs" by Kansas City's NFL team. While it's believed that the team was named after former Kansas City mayor Harold "The Chief" Bartle, many find the team's use of American Indian imagery, including an arrowhead logo, offensive.
You need to be logged in in order to post comments
Please use the log in option at the bottom of this page