The fact of good faith opinion is no defense. The fact that it's a publication for a genuine academic purpose is no defense. Experts say the outcome may draw a line between what can and cannot be published, a possibility that alarms free speech defenders and gives hope to those who feel bigotry should have a leash. It is not my purpose in the present letter to itemize the large number of things that you said that were ill-considered or duplicitous. Rather, I will use the opportunity of the present letter to no more than make two points that your debating tactics are juvenile, and that your goals are totalitarian.
Racism is the taboo through which it is being done.
Doug Collins' writing is colorful and rich in imagery, as one would expect of a journalist who wants to be read. It is humorous. It is satirical. In other words, instead of acknowledging your first misrepresentation of what Doug Collins had said, you preferred to offer viewers a substitute misrepresentation of what he had said. Possibly not too many.