Dumbass
I don’t think she should graduate from college until she passes a basic English literacy test. She read a simple sentence in her “expensive” textbook and misinterpreted it.
Kelbie Murphy, a senior at the university, paid roughly $100 for an assigned textbook in her International Public Relations course. In Chapter 8, the opening passage reads: “An internet search produces the following modifier for identity: corporate, sexual, digital, public, racial, national, brand, and even Christian (a U.S.-based white supremacist group).”
“The way it was worded, it listed several marginalized groups, but then only called Christians to be White supremacists,” Murphy told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview. “But the scariest thing is that the book was written in 2007.”
That’s not a particularly expensive textbook.
The fact that “identity” when modified by “Christian” refers to a racist, white supremacist organization outraged her because she couldn’t comprehend that “Christian identity” is a narrow subset of Christian thought, and thought it was maligning all of the Christian faith (although maybe it was an accurate misreading, that wasn’t what the textbook was saying). She got lots of views on TikTok, and even got highlighted on Fox News, two places where ignorance prospers.
Dan McClellan dismantles Murphy’s whole argument.
The University of North Georgia should be ashamed if they cave in to her lies.
So Kelbie thinks the book is saying (among other things) that black Christians are white supremacists. She should change her first name to Karen.
Lies, Christians, FOX and social media ride the same train of intentional ignorance. Way too many people believe what these entities are selling. Trump, using FOX, Christianity and social media has got the MAGA base to believe anything he says is the truth, screw accuracy.
I didn’t know that “Christian Identity” was a specific white supremacist group descended from British Israelism either. I suppose if you don’t know that then the wording does seem like it’s calling all Christians white supremacists.
A faux pas that a public relations textbook should have flagged and corrected. Maybe it was an example of terrible PR?
She could just have looked it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
@3 Your response suggests the text book is beyond your reading level. If you don’t understand that the whole point of the sentence is to set up the idea that specific pairings of a variety of words followed by “identity” creates very different meanings, then you don’t know how to read the sentence.
yeah, Zuck, blah blah, but here’s a reel I just saw an hour ago on this very person and her blatant lies to Fox News (and the proof that she was lying, based on her earlier videos).
https://www.facebook.com/reel/2260662034375813
oh, hadn’t scrolled far enough past the photo. the reel is the same video as what is shared here from YouTube (granted, another evil empire, but there we are)…just in portrait aspect ratio.
Perhaps even dumber: She sees the list “corporate, sexual, digital, public, racial, national, brand” and refers to it as a list of “marginalized groups.” Did her focus immediately go to “Christian,” ignoring the context?
Meanwhile the New York Young Republicans has been dissolved due to racism, antisemiticism, and is dead and gone. Who’s next?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/17/new-york-young-republicans-suspended/
From my quick look-up, it appears that the University of North Georgia, or at least its primary campus, exists within that state’s 14th Congressional District – the one now represented by Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Any questions?
I got a feeling she’s not a history major.
“Oh… My… GAWD! My Medieval Europe professor, like, just said, like, that Christian did all these, like, terrible things! This, like, can’t be, like, true! I’m going to, like, demand to,like, see the Dean’s manager for this, like, woke indoctrination… like.”
I notice in her Tik-Tok vids she’s using the Fundie Baby Voice the rest of the world was introduced to by Sen. Katie Britt in her SOTU rebuttal. Which suggests to me that the chances are not zero that Ms. Murphy is a White Christian Nationalist who got triggered at thinking she was being called out by her textbook.
Agreed. I have been a bit apprehensive as my text is about $200 (and has been for a while) but a colleague teaching a related class said hers was $400 this year. I think I feel better now. (Or worse, given that it’s likely a lot of the students I teach need to get both.)
Now when I went through my undergrad, I had one text that was $100 – and because of the time that was, it was a VERY expensive text. Times change, inflation governs.(Text book sucked.)
Ridana, that’s one plausible explanation.
I myself took a look and estimate that the three most plausible explanations are:
an (original) inability to parse the compound noun: 10%;
motivated misreading: 40% [that’s yours];
performative misreading for social media traction: 50%
The uni made it quite clear, and she still does not get it, so…
cf. https://accesswdun.com/news/ung-issues-statement-after-student-raises-concerns-over-textbook
Pierce R. Butler @10
Might she be not very distantly related to MTG?
@5 bcw bcw
???
Could you say that over in plain English? Use small words for my small brain, <140 chars thanks!
@ ^ the dishonest trump enabling troll beholder : Well, you said it! I’m gunna have to quote you on that one. Explains a bit. Your brain really must be small indeed to think a vote for anyone other than Kamala Harris wasn’t a vote for Trump and that arguing against Kamala Harris as you and the rest of the Pu(t)ri(di)ty Disunity mob did wouldn’t help inflict Trump as POTUS on the rest of the planet again. Especially after Stein did the same shit in 2016 with the same results and after you were told repeatedly exactly what you were doing and what it would result in.
She ostensibly misparsed the sentence’s structure and failed to distinguish between the noun “identity” and its modifiers (“corporate identity,” “sexual identity,” “digital identity,” “Christian identity” etc. “Christian identity,” which is a known extremist movement, is the compound noun.
The specific error is treating “Christian” as a standalone noun rather than a compound modifier of “identity.”
So, beholder, synthesise that with my #14 and its own explanation.
(You’re now doing the same thing)
I could see getting confused over that paragraph if one thinks in terms of identifying as a Christian and being ignorant of the Christian Identity movement, who kinda engaged in identity theft with that self-ascribed label. The textbook writers might have attempted more clarity with an aside saying that Christian Identity is NOT the same as identifying as a Christian. But this person seems to be deliberately not getting the point at around 8:49 when instead of the confusion over Christian identity she’s engaging in wordplay about Christianity as an identity and the book calling that white supremacist. Leans heavy on cancellation early in the video so yeah. Not a very good faith effort.
I have my own sensitivities about identity politics going in an opposite direction. All those IDW center right atheists who crowed on about identity politics of the Left failed to recognize atheism, the church-state sort highlighted by Hemant Mehta, is an identity politics. But Atheist Identity isn’t coopted as a white supremacist movement.
To be charitable one could have a Christian identity without being Christian Identity. But when the intent of the book is pointed out let it go. OTOH when a new edition is published maybe clarify a bit more so as not to invite such unintended effects.
I’m done pretzeling myself for now…
@8. catballou : Perhaps even dumber: She sees the list “corporate, sexual, digital, public, racial, national, brand” and refers to it as a list of “marginalized groups.” Did her focus immediately go to “Christian,” ignoring the context?
Yes, I reckon it did.
Kelbie Murphy’s initial misunderstanding is one thing – and a bit of basic thought like “Hang on this can’t be right and what its actually saying can it? followed by closer rereading and thought would show that. The problem is she then got so worked up she didn’t accept the obvious reality that the textbook wasn’t saying all Christians are White Supremacists and rejected that reality and substituted her own lying about what the overpriced textbook itself actually said and continually repeating those lies despite them being demonstrably wrong. That’s what’s not excusable or acceptable here.
@12, Ridana :
That seems highly likely to me as well especially given what a big deal she’s made of it. If was a simple Oh Idsidn’t know that Christian identity White Supremacism was a thing ignoance then having her ignorance corrected the response could easily be Oh what a lot of awful deceitful horrid people those White Supremacists are! How dare they misrepresent & hijack Christianity like that and abuse the term for their really ugly purposes’ Instead she’s gone the other way in “How dare they call ME a White Supremacist which, ofc, the text did NOT actually do. Why so defensive, hmm.. ? Suss as.
You would need to get more evidence ofc – look at Kelbie Murphy’s comments and things she’s said and focused on beyond just this one issue and other indicators and tells to confirm that but I have a strong suspicion that Ridana is correct here.
My suggested modification so as not to be misunderstood:
I’d add an endnote that goes on to distinguish between Christian Identity as a white supremacist movement and people who identify as Christians. Textbooks can be kinda crappy when it comes to wording stuff. That 99.99% of people reading this passage didn’t lose their shit could indicate most students aren’t engaging in close reading for imagined offense or even paying any attention after beer pong the previous night.
Hemidactylus, thing is, that’s a tertiary-level textbook, and by that point it’s already Chapter 8.
You can’t judge it absent the context and preceeding and succeeding discussion; this is orthogonal to her refusal to understand it, and the media exposure it yields.
And, hey, as per my #4, She could just have looked it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
John Morales @23
So you mean a textbook for…college students? Sure those are sacred cows with no throwaway paragraphs or poorly worded passages. In my experience it varied how much a professor even taught to a required (why?) text or their lectures.
I don’t think she should graduate from college until she passes a basic English literacy test.
“An internet search produces the following modifier for identity: corporate, sexual, digital, public, racial, national, brand, and even Christian (a U.S.-based white supremacist group).”
“The way it was worded, it listed several marginalized groups, but then only called Christians to be White supremacists,”
If one cannot parse a sentence, if one cannot see it’s akin to the distributive property, then perhaps PZ’s OP has merit.
I put it to you that it is in no sense confusing or ambiguous, and that the uni is bending over backwards to be nice in that link, because it’s damn obvious it’s just another turn of the ‘outrage’ screw, and so this damping.
But, seriously! Do you reckon it can be parsed in any other way?
And, you know, “Kelbie Murphy, a senior at the university, paid roughly $100 for an assigned textbook in her International Public Relations course.”
(The irony drips)
[oops, first para got evaporated. but I think what remains suffices — that is for you, Hemidactylus.
You know my comments are bespoke]