I realize that many of the events I describe (particularly the dishonorableness of the conduct of Dean Schulz and three or four others who cooperated with him), almost defy belief. [See the following pages of the site, available via the menu in the top right margin, for more about the outrageousness of my Dean's, my Chairman's, and my Program Director's treatment of me--and of the Dean's similar treatment of many other College of Communication faculty members: "Part 1: Ten Years of Administrative Retaliation…,” “Public Shaming as an Administrative Technique,” “Lynch Mobs—Secret and Surreptitious Meetings to Foment Students Against a Teacher" and "Playing with Souls/Death Threats--Cynical Administrative Power-games."] All I can say is that for a long time they defied my own belief as well. In nearly thirty years as a full-time faculty member at four different institutions, I have met all types and managed to work amicably with more or less all of them (including some pretty tough customers!); but this Dean was a horse of a different color—and not only for me, but for many other faculty and staff members in my College. If you have trouble believing any of the words or actions I attribute to him, if they seem just too extreme, outrageous, bullying, and dishonest, I would highly recommend that you talk with any of the other faculty members in my College who received similar, though apparently less sustained, treatment. Some of them have resigned or been forced out by the Dean the same way I am convinced he was trying to force me out, but the following individuals remain in the College and though I have not mentioned this document to any of them, I’d think one or more of them would be willing to share a story or two about how they were treated that will seem equally unbelievable or outrageous— [names of four Professors in the College of Communication have been removed at this point]. Each of them experienced the force of Dean Schulz’s wrath at one point or another. (And each of the women has told me in private that she was actually in fear for her physical well-being when the Dean became verbally abusive or threatened to do something to her.) Professor [a fifth Professor’s name has been removed at this point] could also tell a few choice stories, but (along with several other highly accomplished faculty and staff members who either resigned because of the Dean’s treatment of them or were forced out) she is no longer at BU. She was at [the name of a major university has been removed at this point] when I last checked. If you prefer the input of an administrator outside the College of Communication to talking to faculty members who are still within it, I would highly recommend that you have a word with Prof. Sandell. As a member of the Faculty Council/Faculty Assembly, she heard a lot about the Dean’s unprofessional and unethical behavior from many different faculty members (including those I have listed above). Prof. Sandell’s knowledge of the culture of coercion and thuggery Dean Schulz fostered, and of his willingness to threaten, frame, and railroad individuals who expressed different points of view in order to minimize their opposition, or to attempt to fire them or force them to resign if they continued to express independent opinions, was in fact the reason I initially thought she was the best person to send this account to. As a courtesy, I am also sending her a copy of the report. So if you needed to ask her a question about anything in particular that I say, you will be able refer to a particular passage and she can see what I wrote. I have nothing to hide from her, since she heard so many other stories from other faculty members in the College of Communication about these and other events as they actually took place. You have my permission to share anything I have said or written with her if it can help you in any way.
Let me conclude on a different note. I want to repeat something I told you at the end of the hour in your office—that although, in the interests of fleshing out the account, I have included the names of several students in this report (and in the attachments include a set of letters a sympathetic grad student solicited on my behalf without telling me she was doing it), I have, to the very best of my ability, avoided discussing these matters with students, declined their offers to circulate petitions or write letters for me, and generally tried to keep them away from this issue in every way I could. As I told you, in my view, to do those things would only be to play the same game the Dean, my Chairman, my program Director, and at least two other faculty members in my department did. I would be using students as pawns, and abusing my power over them. [For more information about the abuse of students’ faith and trust by the College of Communication Dean, the department of Film and Television Chairman, the Film Studies Program Director, and various other Film and Television department faculty members, see the following site pages: “Lynch Mobs—Secret and Surreptitious Meetings to Foment Students Against a Teacher,” “Playing with Souls/Death Threats--Cynical Administrative Power-games,” and my reply to the letter from the student who said he wanted to come to Boston University to study with me on the “Letters to Prof. Carney” page. All three pages are available via the menu in the right-hand margin of this page.”] It is a matter of principle with me not to use students in this way. My goal, in fact, has been, as much as possible, to shield them from these sorts of internecine battles. Consequently, I would ask that you make every effort to continue to insulate the students I name and others from involvement with these issues. It is just not fair to them, and they can’t possibly understand the intellectual or bureaucratic issues at stake. On top of that, given the current state of affairs in my department and program, it would end up pitting them against their own close friends and their current or former teachers. As I describe in detail in this document, the students have already been used (and their trust abused) by one side, and I don’t want to be a party to doing the same thing, even on my own behalf. [The death-threat I describe in “Playing with Souls/Death Threats--Cynical Administrative Power-games” was one result of the pitting of students against each other in warring camps by unscrupulous authority figures in the College of Communication. I absolutely and categorically refuse to play with students’ emotions in this way, even if means denying myself the benefit of their testimony about the value of my teaching, mentoring, and support.] That is why, as I mentioned in my meeting with you, the two confidential letters I asked to be sent under separate cover to Prof. Sandell as testimony about the true atmosphere in my classroom were solicited from mature, adult auditors. I could have demonstrated the appalling falsehood of the letter from the young woman (and the presumed falsehood of any of the other letters that have been placed in my file that I have not been allowed to see) in other ways—e.g. by referring you to a large number of other students who were present in my classes, or by enlisting groups of students I have taught or worked with to write letters or sign petitions on my behalf—but, as I say, I didn’t want to force them to take sides for or against their teachers or friends. I have seen too many situations over the course of my career [in the Boston University College of Communication] where faculty members and other authority figures have abused their influence over their trusting and inexperienced charges to try to round up support for themselves or to retaliate against an administrator or other faculty member to ever want to play that game myself. It is immoral and irresponsible.