Yes, your hyperbole aside, I do think people should take care in how they speak. 'Urban slang' is pretty clearly associated with a particular socio-economic group (regardless of if you wish to acknowledge that or not), and saying that it, in particular, is the language that needs to be censored is not A Good Thing.
But that doesn't mean this is a grievous sin, or that it's worth getting worked up over. I didn't and am not excoriating him for it. It just struck me as I was reading the article, and I thought it was worth pointing out.
Do you honestly believe that Schiller was referring to race?
No, I don't think Schiller is a racist. But I am a little concerned that it might point to a deeper, socially embedded racism, that the terms that were deemed too offensive may actually have been inner-city slang that has equivalent terms in the accepted dictionary. If the same idea can be expressed in two different ways, one of which is considered vulgar, what, exactly is driving that categorization?
If not, do you honestly believe that a substantial portion of other readers would have interpreted it that way?
I would hope they wouldn't read it and decide that he was a racist, no, but I do think a lot of eyebrows were raised by it, yes.
If not, do you honestly belive that it was unreasonable to use the term?
Yes, I think it was a bad choice of words. Even if you ignore that there are racial connotations in the phrase, it still doesn't express what he means. Who cares about 'city' slang? Suburban or rural slang can't be extremely vulgar?
Anyways, I think it's a little ironic that we're talking about whether he should have to take care in the words he chooses to use, when the issue at hand is that his company is censoring a dictionary.