Memo to the Union:

The news isn't always pretty

COMMENTARY

Those who have read the Aug. 31 issue of the Daily Forty-Niner are aware that Mike Barrett, Associated Students Inc. vice president, was arrested on rape charges Aug 17.

While Barrett has not been found guilty of any charges, we at the Daily Forty-Niner felt that due to his position on campus, the student population had a right to know about the arrest.

However, our friends at the Union, Cal State Long Beach's other newspaper, have implied that the sole purpose of our coverage was to have a nice scandal to showcase. Very well, everyone is entitled to an opinion, even if it is on the front page.

Why did we run the story? Quite simply, it was felt that the arrest of a student leader was not only newsworthy but also important to those who attend this university. Barrett and the other student officers speak for us, the students of this campus. We have at least a cursory right to know about how these people behave.

We did, however, realize the need to present this story as unbiased and as fair as possible, for precisely the reasons cited by the Union. Rape is a heinous crime, and anyone involved in a rape case is subject to public scrutiny. It was for this reason that the writer of the piece was very cautious in his investigation and presentation of the facts.

The original source of this article was a tip from a very reliable source who wished to remain anonymous. After contacting authorities to confirm the accuracy of the information, it was determined that before printing this story, we needed to contact Barrett. To do otherwise would be unfair to him, as all information at this point came from "the other side."

To ensure fair coverage, we gave Barrett's response to our questioning the most visible position in the story's text. Contrary to the Union's claims, we made sure that there were no character judgments, and that all sides were represented. If we had run the story with "Barrett was unavailable to comment," then there may have been some truth to the Union's claims.

The only things we regret in the content of the story were two uses of the word "victim" when in hindsight, "alleged victim" would have been more appropriate.

We would like to state that we did not go looking to "tarnish" Barrett's reputation. Unlike a supermarket tabloid, we have no interest in digging up dirt on someone, let alone offending one of our student leaders.

While profit is nice, the primary interest of this publication is to serve as a laboratory for jouenalism majors. Like the Union, our paper will be printed and on the stands whether or not we have a "scandal" on the front page.

We do, however, take pride in our work. We defend our coverage of Barrett's arrest as important, fair, and professional. For us to have kept quiet about the incident would haave been nothing short of irresponsibility.

While profit is nice, the primary interest of this publication is to serve as a laboratory for journalism majors. Like the Union, our paper will be printed and on the stands whether or not we have a "scandal" on the front page.

We do, however, take pride in our work. We defend our coverage of Barrett's arrest as important, fair, and professional. For us to have kept quiet about the incident would have been nothing short of irresponsibility.