2008 Woodie Awards
Reader's Forum
Student upset with "Student charged, court date set" article
Sam Scribner
Issue date: 2/8/08 Section: Opinion
To the Editor:
Last week's issue of The Acorn was, for the most part, the normal campus newspaper we all expect to read over breakfast when we enter the Commons or the University Center. However, there was an article which made the lower half of the front page that absolutely outraged me. It was the epitome of low-blow, tabloidist, "I-couldn't-find-a-story-so-I-just-unnecessarily-revisited-something-from-last-semester" journalism. Actually, I wouldn't even call it journalism. I would call it borderline slanderous profiling of a student who has been through enough already. I'm sure if you read last week's edition, you are well aware of what I am addressing here. Those who run The Acorn took it upon themselves to make life harder for a student who they don't even know personally. Frankly, I am shocked that the lead editor of The Acorn would even let an article like this fly. Usually stories like these go in the Public Safety blotter-I call it the "funny pages" - where they belong, not entirely out of sight, but still tucked away discreetly with anonymity. Let me elaborate on what I have found wrong with this particular article.
As I've already mentioned, I found the article to be akin to some of the lowest forms of journalism known to public media today. It takes the private, personal facts of somebody's life and, contrary to public necessity, makes them available for all to see. This is typically with intent-even if it is unintended, the results humiliate parties in question. This specific article then, shows nothing but a pure lack of respect for the reputations and personal business of fellow students. This isn't like the tabloids covering Britney Spears, because we know that everything Britney does is purely for media attention. For that reason, I can stand to let tabloids be tabloids and bratty celebs remain the way they are. But the article that takes the private life of someone who is trying to avoid further trouble and personal expense more than an entire month after the fact, and puts it out for all to see when things finally start to look up-that article deserves the most critical of responses in my eyes. There is an even larger matter here, though.
Last week's issue of The Acorn was, for the most part, the normal campus newspaper we all expect to read over breakfast when we enter the Commons or the University Center. However, there was an article which made the lower half of the front page that absolutely outraged me. It was the epitome of low-blow, tabloidist, "I-couldn't-find-a-story-so-I-just-unnecessarily-revisited-something-from-last-semester" journalism. Actually, I wouldn't even call it journalism. I would call it borderline slanderous profiling of a student who has been through enough already. I'm sure if you read last week's edition, you are well aware of what I am addressing here. Those who run The Acorn took it upon themselves to make life harder for a student who they don't even know personally. Frankly, I am shocked that the lead editor of The Acorn would even let an article like this fly. Usually stories like these go in the Public Safety blotter-I call it the "funny pages" - where they belong, not entirely out of sight, but still tucked away discreetly with anonymity. Let me elaborate on what I have found wrong with this particular article.
As I've already mentioned, I found the article to be akin to some of the lowest forms of journalism known to public media today. It takes the private, personal facts of somebody's life and, contrary to public necessity, makes them available for all to see. This is typically with intent-even if it is unintended, the results humiliate parties in question. This specific article then, shows nothing but a pure lack of respect for the reputations and personal business of fellow students. This isn't like the tabloids covering Britney Spears, because we know that everything Britney does is purely for media attention. For that reason, I can stand to let tabloids be tabloids and bratty celebs remain the way they are. But the article that takes the private life of someone who is trying to avoid further trouble and personal expense more than an entire month after the fact, and puts it out for all to see when things finally start to look up-that article deserves the most critical of responses in my eyes. There is an even larger matter here, though.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Sheryl
posted 2/08/08 @ 9:27 AM EST
Well, KP was asked to be interviewed, but she refused. And the picture the Acorn used was on facebook which is public records, like KP arrest, so there would be no point in the Acorn getting a lawyer. (Continued…)
Michelle
posted 2/08/08 @ 11:49 AM EST
I think you have a skewed idea of journalism. This article contained absolutely no judgement as you imply. We are an unbiased publication and report the facts exactly as they are presented to us. (Continued…)
Post a Comment