Reactions to Deadspin's Dave McKenna's report yesterday, "Redskins' Indian-Chief Defender: Not a Chief, Probably Not Indian," are spreading across the Web and here ICTMN presents a few of the top ones. Meanwhile, still not a related peep out of the Pigskins camp yet, including in their "morning roundup of what the local and national media have to say about the Washington Redskins." And the original May 3 interview with "Chief" Stephen Dodson, including the video, remains the same on Redskins.com.
1. Michael Tomasky, Newsweek/Daily Beast special correspondent and editor of Democracy: A Journal of Ideas
"Click through on the [Deadspin.com story link] to read about how sloppily and cavalierly and plain old incorrectly the WFO (Washington football organization, which I'll use heretofore as shorthand) described Dodson's alleged lineage, showing that no one at the organization really gave one-tenth of a shit about where these people actually come from.
Read Tomasky's article: Dan Snyder's Indian Chief Is Neither
2. Mike Florio, NBCSports.com Pro Football Talk primary editor and contributor
"[The] Redskins, who apparently have chosen to dispense with steps like vetting a guest, put [Dodson] on their in-house web show, described him as a Chief, and had him explain why he supports the name. And, yes, the guy actually said that Native Americans on the “reservation” actually great each other with, “Hey, what’s up, redskin?”"
Read Florio's column: Defense of Redskins name includes fake Chief
3. Eric Malinowski, BuzzFeed.com senior sports writer
"The ridiculousness of Dan Snyder’s ridiculous tenure as Washington Redskins owner is something we’ve all become familiar with, but it’s reassuring to know that someone so comfortable in their role can always come up with a new trick or two."
Read Malinowski's story: Loathsome Owner Outdoes Self By Employing Dubious “Chief” To Defend “Redskins” Name
Please share your thoughts on the situation with ICTMN by commenting below.