Review,
Perps Editor, Suck
To
the Editors:
I
believe it is safe to say that the world has lost its mind. As long
as I have been at Oberlin, and presumably far longer, the Review
has had accusations of bias flung upon it from far and wide. One
becomes rather numb to these allegations, because most are made
in fits of emotion by people who feel scorned by some upstart young
wannabe journalist. Normally, I give this paper a little slack,
partially because I have worked there myself and have been the subject
of unfair accusations, but most importantly because I know that
the individuals who work there make sincere efforts to produce a
good paper.
So I was stopped in my tracks the moment a few weeks ago when I
actually had reason to believe that extremely poor judgment had
been exercised by the Review. I had learned that the editor of this
very Perspectives page was a member of the Student Finance Committee,
which was characterized as one of the most powerful committees
on campus in a recent editorial. In fact, on the same page as that
editorial, was a letter defending SFC written by one of its members
who also happens to moonlight as a staff-writer at the Review. This
is unacceptable. Even as students, decisions must be made about
what interests to sacrifice and what to pursue.
It seems these individuals are unable to make these decisions. While
it is commendable that these people have chosen to recuse themselves
from votes that involve the Reviews funding, it remains problematic
that there are members of a powerful committee in control of the
editorial opinion of the most read publication on campus. If a student
newspaper is to fairly address campus issues, it must be free of
influence and biases that may affect coverage. Whos to say
that the Review wont shy from challenging SFC or other organizations,
should any controversies arise, because it refuses to rock the boat?
How do we know that it will not be selective in its coverage to
an irresponsible extent?
As student journalists, writers and editors of a campus publication
claiming to be the newspaper of record must remove themselves from
participation in other organizations should that participation threaten
to adversely affect their objectivity, or conversely, their ability
to participate within that organization. What would the implications
be for The New York Times if a member of the FCC sat on its editorial
board? What about Rudolph Guiliani, Hillary Clinton or George Bush?
Hopefully, the public would be outraged, as it should be in this
case.
We certainly cannot expect perfection from a student newspaper,
or any other newspaper. However, we can expect student journalists
to make every effort to avoid bias, whether actual or perceived.
Bill
Lascher
College senior
|