Mike Wise won't say "Redskins"?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/11/AR2006081101460_4.html

 

I love that, if Wise is indeed trying to tweak Daniel Snyder's boys.

 

It indeed seems to be the case. In two other columns on the team, he didn't use Redskins either.

Unless Mike has stated that he's doing this on purpose, I find it interesting, though, that this letter writer noticed. I wouldn't have if I didn't look for it.

 

It's intentional:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/16/AR2005091601640.html



As you're drinking out of your Redskins mug Monday night while wearing your Redskins T-shirt -- supporting your make-believe Indians against those reviled Cowboys -- think long and hard about what a sweet way to "honor" a people that is. And, please, enough with this, "We're paying homage to the bravery and warrior mentality of the Native American." That's the same tired excuse Florida State University uses to continue the tradition of a student on horseback in full Hollywood regalia, chucking a flaming spear into the ground at midfield before football games, while thousands of people participate in the Tomahawk chop and the accompanying war chant also popular at Atlanta Braves games. The truth: The indigenous people of this continent were almost all hunters, gatherers, craftsmen and craftswomen before some of our ancestors nearly exterminated them and turned them into B-western caricatures.

I have been wanting to write about this issue since I got this job 18 months ago. The boss told me to hold out before I alienated most of the city, their pigmented Indian-face flags flopping along the Beltway on the way to FedEx Field on a September morning. All those liberal crusaders in the District and suburban Washington, working and writing for their own passionate causes but pleading ignorance on this one.

So I waited a year and observed, trying not be too judgmental, figuring I was just some knee-jerk newcomer who didn't get it.

I still don't get it.

Why, whether you're black or white, Hispanic or Asian, whether you're well off or getting by on public assistance, on the left or on the right, is most everyone okay with the term "Redskin?" Why am I still waiting for Daniel Snyder to understand that if his team's logo featured Mandingo tribesmen or orthodox Hasidics, it would be labeled racist and anti-Semitic?

 

I applaud Mr. Wise. Nice to see one of us standing up for something.

 

Didn't one of the Seattle papers make this their policy before last year's playoff game? No "Redskins" references, just calling them "Washington"?

 

Is the copy desk supposed to avoid putting "Redskins" in hedlines or captions with his column? I don't see how he can avoid having some of his copy become stilted because of this. If he wants to protest, he should find other ways to do so than in this goofy manner. Since all the other reporters don't do this, people will start wondering "why doesn't this idiot know the name of the team he's covering?"

 

Well, Dooley, two things:

1) Yeah, to me it's odd that he doesn't use it, and then his copy editors put it in heads and subheads but

2) I read three Redskins columns, and he pulls it off so that you don't really notice unless you're looking for it.

If he hadn't written that he was going to do this, I doubt many people would even notice. There's no doubt concerning the subject matter of any of those columns.

 

Well, the unknown thing is, how much better could his writing be if he didn't worry about the parlor trick/snit?

 

His writing seems fine to me. It's not like putting "As one of the team's receivers" instead of "Redskins' receivers" really changes the flow of a column.

 

That's my take on it, too.

You want to be morally outraged, write your column and be done with it.

Then go cover the team like you're supposed to.

 

how is not writing the name not covering the team? everyone knows who he's talking about. so, there you go. the meaning is getting across, which is what matters