You may be able to find some audio from WPRO, as Dan Yorke played the allegedly offensive tape on his show when this first broke. It wasn't particularily offensive, though I would submit that "the phrase" was used a lot -- basically in the context of "we were told not to say ... over the air" -- even though TV, radio, and print media have all made use of quoting it.

While Mike is trying to appear reasonable, and to some degree is a reasonable if not overly cautious person (I know him from when he used to be involved in the College Republicans, as well as Dana and Jon), he was offended that Dana and Jon took their issues to the public, instead of handling it privately. Of course, by "handling it privately," that would mean following Mike's directive, which they felt was irrational or wrong.

Mike announced their firings to the Projo news blog before he even told Dana and Jon, which if anyone was listening, was done live on Dan Yorke's show, after Mike had spent a considerable amount of time saying that they were only "indefinitely suspended." Dan called Mike out on that, and the rest of the show went downhill from there. The reason that was stated over the air by Mike was that he was using the media as a means of firing them, because they had used the media to air their grievances about the attempt to silence them from using those words in a news context. It came off as pretty tasteless.

I think there could have been better communication, and that Mike's rationale for asking them to refrain from using the phrase was based on erroneous concerns. The VP doesn't have to "order" anyone to do anything, if he thinks he's made his point clear. The VP made a comment to the General Manager, which then mentioned something to Mike, who then conveyed it to his radio staff. My impression is that Dana and Jon at the time they heard Mike convey his views was that they were to take it seriously because it was more or less a request of the VP, who if they didn't comply, could make all their lives miserable. I don't think any of the parties are blameless in this matter, I find it unfortunate that Mike decided to use his power over them in such a way.

"It might arouse less suspicion if the students were out in the public offering their own intellectual position and explanation"

While "suspicion" might be a bit strong, Justin is correct that the students need to continue exercising their right to speak by elaborating on the incident. The big question for me is why they repeated the phrase in question several times.

I would also agree with Will that neither the students nor the program director covered themselves in glory by announcing major developments to the press rather than taking a minute to first inform the affected party.

Now wait a minute, Will. At 6:01 p.m. on Tuesday 4/24, I received the following email from Dana Peloso:

As of 5:15pm April 24, 2007 student lead radio hosts Dana Peloso and Jon Porter, hosts of the Tuesday morning conservative talk show "Morning Again" on 88.3 WQRI at Roger Williams University have been suspended indefinitely for their coverage of the recent Don Imus Firing. They received the word of the suspension from WQRI program director Mike Martelli who has been heavily influenced by the Vice President of the University, John King. King contacted Martelli last week in a feeble attempt to have the show pulled when the dual hosts covered the news worthy item on a special Sunday edition of their show. King said the wording "Nappy Headed Hoe's" was distasteful for the radio even though the hosts weren't using the phrases in a derogatory inflammatory way, rather reporting the news as it was current. This morning's edition of the show started out as normal, with the two leading into the now current news of Kings attempt to un-justfully censor the radio show. This morning's show has been recorded for further press releases and on request, although the quality is not the best due to the technology in the studio, but it is more than understandable. Martellis order to have the two pulled from their morning routine comes only after King was asked to appear on the show and defend his stances on the issue; King not only refused, but subsequently Martelli Has ordered the "Morning Again" radio show pulled until further notice. When asked who made the complaints about this mornings show, Martelli responded only with "That's not for you to know, you work for me, not the other way around."

I suppose the 5:15 p.m. firing could have been done on Yorke's show, although I'm surprised, if that's the case, that the press release didn't mention it, as it's an interesting note. I'm also surprised that several WPRO folks were on the extensive "to" list of that email, if the breaking news happened on their own station.

As for the "Projo news blog," the first mention of the incident that I can find on the Projo Web site is from the 25th, with a follow up on the 26th.

Justin,

As far as I recall, the "firing" did not occur at 5:15pm. That time I believe refers to the day before when they were told that they were being "indefinitely suspended" (which is what they were still under the impression was the case when they first came on Dan's show in the 3:00pm hour the following day). I believe they were on Dan's show the day after being put on the indefinite suspension.

I will try to clarify the rest. The RWU controversy with Dana and Joe took up almost the entire Dan Yorke show, beginning in the 3 o'clock hour. Dan had Dana, Jon, Mike, and Mr. King on at various points, all whom were acting more or less civil (though Mr. King all but called Dana and Jon liars).

At some point between 4:30 and 6pm (I was busy during that time, so I don't know what precisely was said during this period of time), Dana and Jon received word over the air by Mike himself, in reaction to Dan mentioning something that he claimed he was reading off of projo.com (not sure if that refers to the normal site or to the 7to7 blog) that stated that they had been "fired."

Dan asked Mike to confirm it (because it was diffent than what had been said over the air up until then) which eventually he did. Mike gave an interview with someone at the Projo stating that they had been "fired" before he actually told them personally. Mike also said over the air that he had used the media to announce the firings because Dana and Jon had used the media (in the form of the widely distributed press release) to bring this out in the open. Dan then berated Mike with various epithets, including but not limited to referring to the diminuative size of Mike's gonads, etc. The show started out pretty calmly, but when that was said, all heck broke lose. All I know is that it was handled very poorly. You might find it helpful if you are able to get a recording or transcript from WPRO, as it was a fast paced conversational show.

I apologize; I wasn't reading closely enough. I guess I'm just not clear on the difference between indefinite suspension and the show's being "pulled until further notice" and firing (which, of course, can be undone).

My initial concerns still stand, though. I suppose I'm tempermentally inclined, as well, to think that an email sent to everybody and anybody in the Rhode Island media within forty-five minutes of a suspension is not the best way to come to a more satisfying agreement. It seems more like jumping at an opportunity for recognition.