FanHouse

In a column that was intended to explain why a Detroit Pistons fan couldn't root for the Boston Celtics in the NBA Finals, ESPN's Jemele Hill wrote that cheering "for the Celtics is like saying Hitler was a victim."

Those words were quickly removed from her ESPN.com column, but the damage had been done: Hill was harshly criticized in the blogosphere and on Boston sports radio, and ESPN suspended her.

Now off suspension, Hill spoke to me by phone today. The interview is below.

The statement released by ESPN said you were relieved of your duties to reflect on the impact of your words. What have your reflections been like over the last week?
It's been a myriad of emotions. Obviously, I was embarrassed. I was frustrated, and at times a little angry. But I wanted to keep in mind the actual offense and not get caught up in the hoopla that surrounded what was done. That's the part that can send you into negative places and I tried very hard and I think I largely succeeded in staying away from that – I never read anything that was written about me or said about me by various blogs or whatever newspapers might have done it.

The e-mails I received were tough and the only point where I really got mad in terms of the reaction was when that radio station in Boston posted my telephone number and address. That, I thought, was completely out of line.

Were you scared by that?
Yes, I was. You never know – I realize it was a Boston radio station so I hope no one is going to come to where I live in [place deleted], but it's never a good thing when this information is available, and I thought that was pretty classless. It made for some interesting times in terms of answering the telephone. Got a lot of hang-ups, but nobody left any messages that were frightening.

Who read the column before it appeared on ESPN.com? Shouldn't whatever editor approved it have taken some heat as well?
I'm not sure who edited it. As far as whether or not they deserve any punishment, I don't know about that. I have no idea. Nothing has been said to me about that. I just deal with my situation individually. It still doesn't take away from the fact that I wrote it. I know what an editor's job is, and it doesn't let me off the hook or absolve me.

I believe this is the second time you've been reprimanded by an employer for a column you wrote – there was also the time your bosses at the Orlando Sentinel reprimanded you for your column about Willis McGahee, right?
Yes, that was the first time – I got reprimanded for something somebody else said. Yeah, it happened in Orlando, I was given a disciplinary note in my personnel file because of that. The editor didn't like the context of some things he said about the mothers of his children. I didn't see a problem with it just because it was his opinion, he answered the question.

So is that similar to this?
I was more upset about [being disciplined for] that one than this one. I'm fine with everything that happened in this case as far as the fallout for me personally because I felt I deserved it. In that case I didn't feel like I deserved it just because, again, I didn't say it. The attention that the Willis McGahee thing received was generally positive – not for him, but for the paper, hits on the web site, people talking about it.

You were critical of Don Imus. Do you see any similarities between what you wrote and what Imus said, and has this incident led you to reconsider anything you wrote about Imus?
No, I wouldn't reconsider anything that I wrote about Don Imus. I stand behind it. As for the similarities, I'll let people be their own judge. I know some people were putting me in that category and it's certainly their right to do so. I feel differently and I think pulling Imus into this is kind of a distraction. This shouldn't be about whether me and Imus should share the same fate, this should be about my particular insensitivity and not his. I hope this is about me being better as a columnist and as a person.

Will Leitch at Deadspin wrote, "Hill's a fine writer, but anytime you say 'Hitler,' whatever point you're trying to make is obliterated." Do you think that's true?
Yeah, he's probably right about that. I think where I failed as a writer is I'm not sure I had a full grasp of that before I wrote that column. I would never dream of joking about the Holocaust in a column. I would never do that. Hitler to me seemed in a different category, but obviously I was wrong with that. So yeah, I would probably agree with Will, it can only go bad places once you bring that name into the fold.

You posted something on your personal blog saying you got e-mails calling you the N-word. How many such e-mails did you get?
A lot. But I hesitate to get into that because I'm not a victim and I don't want it to come off like I'm saying, 'Oh, look what happened to me.' These are the consequences of my action. It doesn't give anybody the right to call me that, and this is the nastiest batch of mail I've received, ever, in my 11-year career. But I don't want that to be the focus. I don't want that to distract from the issues at hand. I don't feel sorry for myself and don't want others to feel sorry for me. But that is something that you have to deal with if you're a black columnist. But I certainly don't think that's representative of all Celtics fans or all people from Boston. People tend to get emotional and say things that they wouldn't say if you were there in person.

Overall, what was the response like? Any positive responses?
Yes, I received a number of e-mails from colleagues, other people in the business that I've known for years, that was very uplifting to know that they were in my corner because I didn't want people who knew me to think less of me.

I also received a number of e-mails from people who were Jewish and I was very encouraged by those e-mails, all very reasonable, rational, some thought it was no big deal, some did, it was across the board, but people wanted to know why I wrote it -- they just wanted to understand and those led to some good conversations.

Your First Take colleague Dana Jacobson also served a suspension. Have you had an opportunity to talk to her about this?
Yeah, I did. I did talk to Dana and she was very helpful, very supportive. She was somebody who, having been through this before, was a good person to commiserate with. We talked for like an hour on the telephone and it was very nice to talk to someone else who had been through this.

Who else at ESPN did you hear from?
Gene Wojciechowski, Skip Bayless sent me an e-mail – Skip and I have a good relationship, so that didn't surprise me. Bill Simmons sent me an e-mail. A lot of producers did. Some people at ESPN the Magazine. A wide variety of people. There were people I didn't think I had met yet who sent me e-mails and I was very surprised and pleased to have that kind of support within the company.

Putting this incident aside, do you think you've received more than your fair share of criticism throughout your career?
I've received a lot. But I'd like to think it's mostly because I've given a lot of criticism too. When you write about race you're going to make yourself a target, I don't care who you are. I think that has probably fueled a lot of that. A lot of the reactions last week were based on the fact that I have written about race previously. If I never had I'm not sure people would have cared as much ... I don't know if the reaction would have been the same if I didn't address those issues in my column. I know that I am a little bit different than other columnists out there. Clearly, my gender and race make me different, and also the subjects I choose to tackle, I feel passionate about and when you feel passionate about your subject people are going to throw some of that back right at you.

You mentioned gender and race, I would also add age. Does the fact that you're young, female, and black, whereas high-profile sports columnists tend to be old, male and white, contribute to some of the criticism you've received?
It's a different look. I would agree, age definitely is a factor. In a situation like this people think I'm in this situation because of experience or lack of experience -- even though I got an early start, so I've been in this business longer than people probably know. I'd say those things contribute, but I don't think it's the total reason. Subject matter is important. When you write about polarizing issues you become something of a polarizing figure yourself. Of course, people were furious because I think in some people's minds I'm someone who came out of nowhere.

I've never shied away or ducked criticism and I'm not going to start now. I'm also not going to internalize it because the people who didn't think I deserved to be in this position, I'm not going to win them over so it's no use to me fretting about it because it's not going to happen.

Do you think there's a certain amount of jealousy behind the criticism of you? Jealousy that you got a high-profile job at a young age? Jealously that, according to The Big Lead, you make $200,000 a year?
That's an incorrect salary, first of all. I don't know if "jealousy" is the right word. When you see someone you hadn't heard of come out of nowhere and get a high-profile job, and then there's a salary that's reported that people think is too much, there is some of that, but I would never say I get it worse than somebody else because of jealousy. When you come in the door and your salary is out there – even if it's incorrect – it puts it in people's minds that, "Every time I read this column, I better get my money's worth." It's no different for an athlete. You don't expect a lot out of a guy making league minimum, you expect a lot out of a guy making $28 million. Coming in with that notoriety certainly changed things a bit.

The Big Lead also reported in October of 2006 that you had signed a two-year contract. Does that mean you might only have a few months left at ESPN?
It was actually November of 2006. Yeah, you're right. It's closer than I thought it was. I'm sure there will be some talking. I usually leave that in the hands of my very capable manager. I try not to think about that. My relationship with ESPN has been very positive and I do not anticipate any contentiousness around that. I have no doubt that will continue.