Communication Center Journal Vol. 6 - No. 1, 2020 - Is the Communication Center Racist? An Inquiry into Black Linguistic Justice, Anti-Racism, and Assimilation

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by kopisore

An inquiry into how racism disrupts communication center work and how linguistic justice exposes the false link between “standard” or academic English and basic respect. The text critiques the conflation of White Mainstream English with universal humanity, arguing that tolerating the absence of Black Language harms both Black and non-Black students. It reframes individual center interactions within disciplinary systems that privilege whiteness, drawing on examples of policing and scholarship on writing centers and justice.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages15

Reading Time38 min

AccessFree to download

Background

White Mainstream English and the presumption of protection

The absence of Black Language in communication center spaces

Communication center work, justice, and disciplinary context

Reframing interactions in a system that privileges whiteness

Communication Center Journal Vol. 6, No. 1, 2020 Is the Communication Center Racist? An Inquiry into Black Linguistic Justice, Anti Racism, and Assimilation Nimisha Ladva Haverford College “The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work.” —Toni Morrison, New York Times, August 6, 2019 Background What is the core of communication center work and how does racism distract from it? In the opening paragraphs of Linguistic Justice, April Baker-Bell (2020) deftly separates the conflation between speaking standard or academic English, or what she calls White Mainstream English (WME), and the presumed protection this English confers on Black bodies. The conflation between this English—the kind of English I teach in my writing classes, the kind of English we hear in our communication centers, the kind of English I speak—and the humanity, the basic respect, that such speech presumably conferson all its speakers is a lie evidenced again and again in police killings: If y’all actually believe that using“standard English” will dismantle white supremacy, then you not paying attention! If we, as teachers, truly believe that code switching will dismantle white supremacy, we have a problem. If we honestly believe that code switching will save Black people’s lives, then we really ain’t paying attention to what’s happening in the world. Eric Garner was choked to death by a police officer while saying “I cannot breathe.” Wouldn’t you consider “I cannot breathe” “standard English”syntax? (p. 5) Both the form and content of this passage struck me. I hadn’t connected my privileging ofWME to basic human respect until this moment. Or rather, I assumed the respect that WME confers to be equal and universal. As someone who spoke a different English with my immigrant parents than I did on campus, both as a student and later as a faculty member, I was clear about the advantages that WME had produced forme. I accepted WME as the English that gave me and others who spoke it, as the particular version of English that grants access to all sorts of social goods: better jobs, more leadership, fuller lives. I also tracked my reaction to Baker-Bell’s use of Black Language (BL) . Certainly, I did not understand her less because of the way she wrote, but I did notice that she used it. BL ’s presence in her text foregrounded for me its profound absence in my academic world in the things I read and almost everywhere on the small liberal arts college campus where Iteach. BL was absent in the predominantly white college classroom, in tutoring appointments for speaking, in the hallways, even when Black students were present. Most revealing, however, was that by not questioning this absence before, I always expected and accepted its absence. How is the absence of BL connected to Communication Center Journal Vol. 6, No. 1, 2020 communication studies and communication center work? Writ small, the core of communication center work is to support students (and others who use our centers) to speak their truth in college and beyond. My ignorance in accepting the absence of BL, or active engagement with its absence, is a form of anti-Blackness that affects both Black and non-Black students. We owe all our students a way to understand what is at stake when we continue to tolerate the absence of BL in the communication center. Writ large, the core of communication work is justice. This is not a paper written to shed light on what to do in individual interactions in the communication center, whatever the role the individual, whether the speaker of BL or not, plays: director, consultant, student user, or other. Put differently, this is a paper that seeks toreframe those individual interactions within a larger disciplinary context that privileges whiteness and that exists as a consequence of the enslavement of Black Africans, one of the two original sins at the center of this nation. The other sin, of

FAQs

How does the document define the core purpose of communication center work?

It presents the core as supporting students (and others) to speak their truth in college and beyond. It argues that this purpose is undermined when racism shapes what is treated as legitimate speech.

What is the central critique of “standard English” in the background section?

The document challenges the conflation of standard or academic English with protection and respect for Black bodies, calling it a lie contradicted by evidence such as police killings.

How does the author connect the absence of Black Language to anti-Blackness and communication studies?

The text argues that ignoring or accepting Black Language’s absence is a form of anti-Blackness affecting both Black and non-Black students. It frames the issue as tied to broader disciplinary contexts that privilege whiteness.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by kopisore