Dear Editor,
I am writing to express my concern over the opinion article that was run on April 7, 1997.
It is the responsibility of a school newspaper to be an impartial news source for the students.
Although I understand that it was an opinion piece, I feel that it was irresponsible of the Daily 49er to show bias in an election.
The candidate profiles that were run on Monday, April 7, were fine because you gave each candidate equal time.
In one semester as a journalism student, I learned that it is the responsibility of a news source to give equal time to each candidate.
There are several ways in which this situation could have been improved. You could have run the article earlier so that people would have had the time to respond before the election was over.
You could have kept your opinions to yourself and maintained the integrity of your publication. Lastly, I feel that the masthead proclaiming, "Vote Freeman, Chancy, Coleman," showed very poor judgment and was unfair to the other candidates.
As I write this, I do not yet know the outcome of the election and we will never know what influence your article may have had on the results.
In your future publications please remember this: the pen is mightier than the sword. Use your power wisely.
Sincerely,
Shannon Crotts,
resident coordinator,
housing and residential life
Newspapers frequently endorse candidates and issues. Study the LA Times and the Orange County Register the next time election season rolls around. Each paper endorses the opposite of the other.
The Daily Forty-Niner is no exception. When covering news, we strive for objectivity, when writing editorials, the gloves are off.
The general consensus in the newsroom was that the candidates mostly sounded like seasoned slicksters spouting feel-good filler.
No one said anything of substance. All of the candidates wanted to "empower students." Hear that 112 times and see what kind of editorial you would write.
Jody Banks, the city editor, gave every candidate a fair shot at expressing him or herself. She studied the Elections Commission Information Questionnaire that each candidate had to fill out.
Many of the candidates did not even bother to answer the questions. Banks called every candidate at least once.
Obviously the ones who returned her calls or explained their responses on the questionnaire were treated more favorably.
It is up to the candidates to show initiative. The media is a powerful tool. Politicians that court the media have a distinct advantage over those who do not.
As for your suggestions about how the paper could have been more fair, I agree we could have run the opinion piece earlier.
That way the candidates could have had time to respond. Our running it when we did was a last-minute call.
Telling us to keep our opinions to ourselves to maintain the integrity of the paper is not rational. The editorials are the heart of any newspaper.