Former Columbia Journalism Review Editor Responds to Dismissal, Calls Interaction Standards ‘Normal’

The former editor of the Columbia Journalism Review has publicly defended his professional conduct following complaints that reportedly resulted in his termination. Sewell Chan, who served as the executive editor for the prominent publication managed by the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, announced on Friday his dismissal after just eight months in the role.

In a career spanning over 25 years, Chan has built a notable background, including previous positions as editor-in-chief of The Texas Tribune and senior roles at both The Los Angeles Times and The New York Times.

In a statement shared on social media, Chan expressed his surprise at the incident, stating, “This was the first time in my 25-year career that I’ve experienced disciplinary action — let alone termination from a job. I have immense respect for Dean Jelani Cobb as a journalist and educator, yet the decision to terminate my position felt hasty and ill-considered. It is frankly baffling.”

Crisis After Short Tenure

Shortly after his firing, Chan outlined the events that transpired leading to his dismissal. He emphasized that he had joined CJR with the intent to breathe new life into the organization, which had operated without a permanent editor for nearly a year before his arrival. Chan characterized his tenure as “brief but eventful,” noting that his team’s work received notable industry recognition.

Just days before his termination, Chan became aware of staff complaints stemming from what he described as “pointed interactions” where he provided constructive feedback rooted in rigorous editorial standards. He asserted that his comments would not have been out of place in any professional newsroom.

Pointed Conversations Prompt Concerns

Chan elaborated on the specific circumstances surrounding the staff complaints, highlighting one interaction in which he raised concerns regarding an ethical issue. This involved a staff member passionately dedicated to the Gaza protest causes and reporting on a detained Palestinian graduate with whom he had an apparent personal connection. In this context, Chan expressed the need for editorial integrity.

In another incident, Chan mentioned he pressed a reporter about a looming deadline. A separate instance involved a staff member who did not comply with university expectations to work in the office and meet designated story quotas.

Defending Workplace Norms

Chan maintained that his feedback and comments in these discussions represented what he considered normal workplace interactions, characterized by rigorous, fair, and careful editorial oversight. He noted that such standards have been accepted practice at other media organizations where he has worked.

“The norms at Columbia appear to differ significantly from those I have encountered elsewhere,” Chan remarked.

Dean’s Silence on the Matter

As the situation continues to garner attention, Dean Jelani Cobb of the Columbia Journalism School has not provided a public response to inquiries about Chan’s termination. His silence raises questions about the university’s internal culture and the expectations placed on editorial leadership.

A Look at Editorial Standards

Chan’s situation shines a spotlight on the evolving standards of editorial practices within journalism. In a field where feedback and rigorous oversight are crucial for maintaining quality, the balance between editorial accountability and employee relations often proves challenging. Journalism organizations must find a way to foster environments where critical feedback is seen as part of professional growth, rather than a potential point of contention.

The incident also calls attention to the broader implications of workplace dynamics in media organizations, particularly when it comes to expectations around communication and interaction styles. As journalism continues to evolve, understanding and adapting to these dynamics becomes crucial for both leadership and staff.

Moving forward, it will be essential for organizations like Columbia Journalism Review to reflect on how internal interactions affect overall operations and morale. In this context, fostering open dialogue and establishing clear expectations could prove vital in navigating similar situations in the future.

Final Thoughts on the Dismissal

While the outcome of this situation remains to be seen, Sewell Chan’s experience emphasizes the importance of clarity in workplace standards, particularly within the realm of journalism. As the industry holds a critical role in shaping public discourse, the need for ethical practices and respectful communication cannot be overstated. Ultimately, understanding the balance between rigorous editorial feedback and fostering a supportive work environment will be key in shaping the future of journalism, both at Columbia University and throughout the industry.