A NOTE FROM THE MODERATORS
We want to be clear that the moderator community is aware of the criticism being made about the DBR front page article. We have no control over articles on the main DBR pages. Our authority extends only to these forums.
Thanks for your posts on the matter. The folks in charge of the DBR front pages have been informed of your comments. If you are upset about the article on the DBR Front Page, we suggest sending an email to the DBR Front Page managers at: heydbr@gmail.com
The post below is the first post in this thread and is by A-Tex Devil
================================================== ======
I haven't posted in a while, and frankly, this whole year since 2020 basketball season was cancelled is one whole nightmare exhibition season for college sports in general in my opinion, but whatever. That's a different discussion
I also haven't been a close follower of the women's team since I left the east coast many years ago. Just bandwidth. That said, the article on McCallie on the front page seems like a bit of a "just asking questions here" hit piece with a lot of speculation and not a lot of actual knowledge of what happened behind the scenes or even what her actual obligations were. I know she struggled at Duke, and maybe I am incorrectly reading the tone. But the article made me uncomfortable reading it. Don't ever remember feeling that way reading something published on the front page of this board. Just my opinion.
Last edited by JasonEvans; 01-14-2021 at 04:21 PM.
Link: Former Duke Coach Joanne P. McCallie’s New Book Has A Surprising Subject
It’s a weirdly speculative article, like something I might write if I had a deadline, a vague agenda, and a copy of Physicians Desk Reference. Fortunately I have none of those.
I also agree. In my opinion it was totally inappropriate to write this speculating on what her diagnosis might be and to further speculate on whether she acted properly. This should not have been written without knowing the facts and even then it will be questionable.
"We aren’t in a position to say and even to ask the question is uncomfortable."
So why write the article? It offers literally nothing outside of rank speculation. They admit in the article that they haven't even read the book. Rumor-mongering is forbidden on this board. Why on earth would it be permitted on the front page of the entire site?
That's a reprehensible editorial decision.
I stopped at "We don't expect, for instance, that she disclosed her condition when she interviewed for coaching jobs"
This is baseless, and IMO, not becoming of this site.
1200. DDMF.
I came in all fired up to say something. No need. You folks have said what was required. Thanks.
Love, Ima
My view is that even if she is/was mentally ill, she's entitled to privacy and not ethically or legally required to reveal it to anyone. Maybe I'm the minority. I suppose you could argue if she was ill _enough_ for her illness to impact others negatively, then she would be. Who would decide such a thing and how? Maybe her contract required it? I doubt it. Definitely agree it's a speculative piece, speculating on someone else's private health issues. Best to leave the revelations to the coach imo. This article doesn't live up to Duke standards.
I want to be clear that the moderator community is aware of the criticism being made about the DBR front page article. We have no control over articles on the main DBR pages. Our authority extends only to these forums.
Thanks for your posts on the matter. The folks in charge of the DBR front pages have been informed of your comments.
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Nothing new to add but that I agree with the criticism of the front page article. I was uncomfortable reading it.
If you are upset about the article on the DBR Front Page, I would suggest sending an email to the DBR Front Page managers at: heydbr@gmail.com
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
Nothing new to add here except to say: see the Americans with Disabilities Act. The purpose of the ADA is to prohibit employers from discriminating in employment decisions against qualified individuals with disabilities. Bipolar disorder is a disability under the ADA. In other words, if McCallie could do the job with or without a reasonable accommodation of her disability, that is all that matters. Duke could not have asked her about it before hiring her, after hiring or at any time except in very limited circumstance not applicable in this case. She is not required to reveal the condition as a matter of law and Duke can't require her to submit to any medical examination about it. And in my opinion, she is not blameworthy for failing to reveal it to anyone. None of their business. That is the point of the ADA. To say she built her career on a falsehood is tantamount to saying the ADA is meaningless.
I concur with the comments about the ADA, and privacy. That said, Coach McCallie is releasing a book describing the details of her battle with this, so it's no longer "private" (or, at least, some details will/are no longer private.)
I'm interested in reading her book, as I have followed the women's team for years. I was not aware of her illness until recently (it was alluded to on another board, improperly in my view, as the person with the illness did not disclose it at the time) and would like to read how it affected her. Certainly, mental illness still carries a stigma, and I think it's good to have more people describe their battles.