UNC Approves Tenure For Nikole Hannah-Jones

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, Nikole Hannah-Jones, has finally been granted tenure at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

According to NBC News, during a June 30 board meeting, her tenure was approved by a 9-4 vote by the university’s board of trustees.

Hannah-Jones said in a statement, “This fight is about ensuring the journalistic and academic freedom of Black writers, researchers, teachers and students. We must ensure that our work is protected and able to proceed free from the risk of repercussions, and we are not there yet.”

In April, UNC announced Hannah-Jones was appointed to the Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism, where she would teach as a professor while also remaining with The New York Times Magazine. However, UNC offered her a five-year contract with eligibility for tenure review at the end, rather than the tenured position that was typical for past appointments.

RELATED: UNC Declining To Grant Tenure to Journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones Sparks Backlash

According to CNN, in May, the creator of The New York Times’ “1619 Project,” said in a submitted letter to UNC that she would not take a position at the school without tenure.

Hannah-Jones’ lawyers wrote “since signing the fixed-term contract, Ms. Hannah-Jones has come to learn that political interference and influence from a powerful donor contributed to the Board of Trustees’ failure to consider her tenure application.”

“Under these circumstances, any appointment of Ms. Hannah-Jones without tenure is unacceptable,” the letter continues.

UNC received backlash since the alleged influence behind the offer was initially reported. The UNC Board of Trustees told The Washington Post last month that tenure wasn’t offered because Hannah Jones was a “non academic.” Critics responded that the decision didn’t make sense, since the Knight Chair was designed to attract professional journalists.

NBC News reports the reasoning to not offer tenure originally to Nikole Hannah-Jones was not explained at the June 30 board meeting. 

Source link

Related Articles