Burlington v. Fox: The Case of a TV Anchor and the N-Word

Warning: This post discusses epithets that may be offensive or disturbing to some readers.

By Dan Spinelli 

Dan Spinelli is a sophomore at the  University of Pennsylvania studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics (PPE).  

On June 23, 2007, longtime television anchor Tom Burlington walked into an editorial meeting along with eight other personnel. Burlington, a weekend anchor and reporter at Fox 29 — the Philadelphia affiliate of Fox News — joined his colleagues in a discussion of a segment regarding the “symbolic burial” of the n-word by the Philadelphia Council of the NAACP.[1] While discussing the story, Burlington — a white male — asked, “Does this mean we can finally say the word n-----?”

Nearly eight years after the meeting, Burlington, 53, argued in a federal racial discrimination suit that his use of that racial epithet cost him his job and his reputation. He sought damages from the station for firing him on July 12 of that year, weeks after the editorial meeting. Earlier this month, Burlington testified in federal district court in Philadelphia that he has been unable to acquire another job in broadcast journalism after being fired from Fox 29. “The hardest part is my children,” he said in court. “They’ll believe I’m a racist.”[2]

Testimony from his colleagues —both black and white — disputed the notion that Burlington was a racist. He even won prizes as a reporter for covering crimes committed against African-Americans in Texas, North Carolina and Camden, N.J.[3] So why did one seemingly off-the-cuff remark end Burlington’s career?

What exactly Burlington said in the meeting is disputed. He testified to only invoking the epithet one time — in the context of asking whether the full n-word should be used in that night’s broadcast — but in a note recorded by Anne Malone, a sensitivity trainer hired by Fox to meet with Burlington after the incident, he admitted using the word three times in rapid succession.[4] Burlington also used the full n-word repeatedly in apologies to colleagues after the meeting, many of whom were shocked that he continued to use the word.

Burlington claimed that he was only trying to make an intellectual point. “Using ‘the n-word’ just gives the word more power,” he said in court.[5] Many of Burlington’s colleagues did not agree. His co-anchor, Joyce Evans, who was not present at the 2007 meeting, was outraged when she heard about Burlington’s comment. In a later meeting with Burlington, she engaged him in a long and “heated” discussion about the politics of using the n-word.[6] During the conversation, Burlington made a distinction between his use of the word — in the context of a journalistic discussion — and other, pejorative uses of the term. Burlington denied implying anything malicious with this example; he simply wanted to draw a distinction.

Though Burlington had been disciplined with a suspension and referral to sensitivity training, the station ultimately chose to not renew his contract, and he was let go. From the station’s legal perspective, the reason for Burlington’s firing was clear: he had caused tension in the newsroom (evidenced by a staff photographer refusing to work with him after the 2007 meeting), brought negative publicity to the station through numerous articles about the incident in local newspapers and, according to general manager Mike Renda, incited concerns “for [Burlington’s] safety.”[7]

From Burlington’s perspective, the decision came from a racial double standard. Black employees, Burlington said, could use the n-word with impunity. One employee, anchor Dave Huddleston, even referred to an African-American when discussing a news story as “another dumb n-----.”[8] These individuals weren’t disciplined. Black employees, put under intense questioning by Burlington’s lawyer, Laura Mattiacci, said they were offended by Burlington’s non-pejorative use of the word, but admitted to listening to rap music where the epithet is used. Evans and Ameena Ali, the human resources manager at Fox 29, said they are offended by the word in all contexts. No one said that Burlington’s race played any role in their being personally offended, though Burlington testified that Evans told him he couldn’t say the n-word “because he was white.”[9]

Mattiacci framed the case in her closing argument around a singular rulebook applying to employees of all races in the workplace. This case, she said, “is not about whether a white person can say the N-word.”[10] The question, unspoken but acknowledged, was whether procedural rules matter in a world where substantive inequality is the norm. Could a black person’s use of the n-word really hurt the same way as when used by a white person? Intuition would say no, as would the recorded list of zero cases (as far as this writer can find) in which a black employee has been fired for saying the n-word.

That still doesn’t answer the legal question put to the jury: is it a racial double standard for punishing a white person for saying something black people also say? Well, structurally, yes…but does a racial double standard make sense for such a racially charged word?

The answer came a lot quicker than the eight-year odyssey of a trial. In less than three hours, an all-white jury returned the verdict: Burlington lost. Even on a preponderance of a doubt standard, far below the usual threshold of “beyond a reasonable doubt” used in most criminal cases, Fox 29 still won.[11]



[1] Thomas Burlington v. News Corporation, Fox Television Stations Inc., and Fox Television Stations of Philadelphia Inc. (E.D. PA 2010), www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/10d1325p.pdf.
[2] Sam Wood, "Ex-Fox29 Anchor in Court: My Daughters Will Think I'm a Racist," Philly.com, Philadelphia Media Networks, 8 June 2015.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Dan Spinelli, "Former TV Anchor Loses N-word Lawsuit," The Philadelphia Daily News, 16 June 2015.
[5] Sam Wood, “My Daughters Will Think I’m a Racist,” Philly.com.
[6] Dan Spinelli, "N-word Lawsuit Intensifies as Colleague Testifies," The Philadelphia Daily News, 11 June 2015: 3.
[7] Thomas Burlington v. News Corporation, Fox Television Stations Inc., and Fox Television Stations of Philadelphia Inc. (E.D. PA 2010), www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/10d1325p.pdf.
[8] Dan Spinelli, “Former TV Anchor Loses,” The Philadelphia Daily News.
[9] Thomas Burlington v. News Corporation, Fox Television Stations Inc., and Fox Television Stations of Philadelphia Inc. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 23 Dec. 2010.
[10] Dan Spinelli, “Former TV Anchor Loses,” The Philadelphia Daily News.
[11] Ibid.

Photo Credit: Flickr User flash.pro

The opinions and views expressed through this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.