Brings to mind the time that then-President Obama mentioned the word.
In that discussion, there was an important distinction drawn between using the word and mentioning it.
Is the word “nigger” so charged that you cannot even say it out loud when talking about language that offends audiences in comedy shows?
The memo clearly sets forth the rule as the company sees it:
Is the word so charged?, the OP asks. Well of course it is. Is that even a little bit in question?
I go back and forth on the issue of whether it can ever be used denotatively by a non-black person (or by a non-white person) but it doesn’t surprise me at all that there is a strong argument that “no, you just can’t say it.”
On the face of the article that seems ridiculous, If you’re talking about “nigger” in the sense of what words a TV show can or can’t say, then say “nigger”. “n-word” is acceptable but is more childish than just using the word in this context.
Edit: reply to OP not Acsenray.
Ditto Mr Shine. The stance that, if you utter a word in the context of talking about words you shouldn’t say, your behavior is beyond the pale is not reasonable. Particularly when the acceptable substitute that lets you keep your job has a 1-to-1 relationship with the word in question.
I’m not saying he shouldn’t have left, or that someone who is upset by his use of the word shouldn’t be, but I feel that defending the way things went down as an inevitable and wholly reasonable response is not quite right either.
It is beyond inappropriate to use the word to refer to a black person. But my understanding is that is not what Friedland did. We don’t have the exact quote of what Friedland said, but it sounds like it was something like, “You should not say ‘nigger’ in a comedy show because it is so offensive.”
I had not seen the memo you referred to, so if company policy is that prescriptive, then that’s what it is, and Friedland should have understood that.
But in general, can a word be so incendiary that we must pretend it does not exist?
Mainstream media with very strict editorial standards had no problem quoting Trump when he said “shithole” and even Samantha Bee when she said “cunt.” Those words are in a different category but still offensive to many (I curse all the time but was offended by the context in both cases), yet there was little controversy about that reporting because they were talking about the word, not using it.
You also don’t k ow how often or in what context he’s been warned for similar things. I’ve known people who swore up and down they were fired for things that seen as ridiculous as this, but in each case it was after repeated conversations and warnings about similar things. I can imagine a guy who goes out of his way to find “innocuous” opportunities to use the word, just cuz he likes to be transgressive.
These language rules and the virtue signaling are farcical at this point.
In this case we have a very detailed memo in the matter —
You’ve done a pretty decent job of signaling yourself.
Of course. If you aren’t 100.839.9% on board with hysterical over reaction when someone somewhere wrongthinks you are a Nazi!!1!
:rolleyes:
If one is talking about the word and not promoting it, this is akin to banning teachers or historians from showing the Confederate flag in a lesson about the Civil War or from showing images of black slaves in chains.
I don’t agree with the policy, but it looks like the policy was quite clear and the employee was given adequate notice but decided not to comply. I don’t have any sympathy for the employee in that case. Every business has certain rules that employees are expected to follow. If you can’t do that, then out you go!
That straw man is slayed! Well done!
The memo was written after the firing.
Thank you.
Unfortunately, strawmen and strawwomen are infesting more and more of reality.
I agree that the use/mention distinction is important. And, someone should not be fired for mentioning the word as something not to use in comedy, for example.
My guess, and it’s only a guess, is that this isn’t the first time this has come up for this person. I just don’t see a firing for this, unless it’s part of a pattern of behavior.
My personal feelings are: I’m not comfortable with anyone directly employing the word, but it is everyone’s personal choice which word to use when talking about the word.
Plus, not only context but one’s personal history counts here. In other words, if you’re the type of person who loves talking about who is allowed to say what word just so you can drop the n-bomb, then you should probably use that word a little less 
ETA: I see Ritter has said something similar:
There’s no reason for any guesswork to be applied to this situation. It’s all laid out in the memo linked above.
Quoth Louis CK :
Companies are allowed to both have dumb policies and make dumb personnel decisions.