To the Editor:
The Review went out of bounds last week with the article "Ex-Student Pleads Guilty to 8 Charges." As a source of current events pertaining to the college community and campus this story was completely idiosyncratic with the rest of the paper. The story was a personal and private matter which was simply none of the college community's business, especially since it did not directly effect the Oberlin College community.
The incident did not occur during the academic year nor did it occur on campus. It is unfortunate that this "ex-student" fell prey to the campus media scavenging for a story for I am sure that there are many other students with personal stories that do not immediately effect the campus who would like them to remain private. Also, according to the article, the parties involved were not students of Oberlin College. If this person was no longer a student, why is this old piece of news being reported?
I am shocked that a small campus newspaper where circulation is not a major concern allows such low standards of journalism. I do not know what kind of lead there was for this story, but three-quarter's of the article simply restated what the Plain Dealer reported in issues from March and last summer. In journalism of a higher standard a journalist for a 'News' section reports current news and doesn't simply dig into rumors and act as a secondary source of stories, but rather is a primary source of the facts.
It was completely irresponsible and careless for the editor to allow this article to be printed. Reading it amongst the rest of the other news in the Review felt like an act of voyeurism. Basic identification of name, age, and school of the parties involved was printed despite the fact that one was a minor. Such disrespect to those involved and to the college community for invasion of privacy should not be tolerated. Unfortunately cut-throat journalism and muckraking runs the news industry in the 'real world,' but I would expect to find a practice with more ideal standards in a college setting; especially on this politically conscientious campus.
It is disgusting that an article of voyeurism and hearsay was allowed to be printed. The Oberlin Review should re-think its purpose as a college community paper and have some respect for the personal lives of students and townspeople. I am disappointed that for lack of news on this relatively peaceful campus the nationally awarded Oberlin Review has begun to sink to the levels of sensationalism.
Copyright © 1997, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 125, Number 21; April 18, 1997
Contact Review webmaster with suggestions or comments at ocreview@www.oberlin.edu.
Contact Review editorial staff at oreview@oberlin.edu.