Edgitorials

Dear Katelyn,

I can see that you are a lover of the thesaurus, a detractor of brevity and an ardent social activist, and while your argument is not unjustified, allow me to pose a question.

If our slogan had been “The start of pussy journalism,” would you still ask us to change it or question our motives? Regardless of the absurdity of the question, my gut tells me no. Why? Because the SpartanEdge slogan did not refer to female genitalia. My dictionary provides multiple definitions for the term pussy: 1) a cat, 2) a furry flower growing on a tree (as in the catkin of a pussy willow tree), 3) genitalia, 4) weakness. Unless SpartanEdge was a publication written by or for female genitalia, the slogan above wouldn’t make any sense.

I have not been involved with SpartanEdge very long, but my understanding of the slogan was always that it referred to other news organizations, the State News in particular. In other words, the growth of online news organizations and internet communities is fostering a new era of sharing information. If someone feels that they are being ill served by the existing news institutions, they can easily find another source to draw from. This is the essence of SpartanEdge—to allow students to tell the stories that other news organizations aren’t willing and able to tell, in a unique, interesting and unrestricted way.

I can say with nearly the utmost of certainty that no member of SpartanEdge has anything against female genitalia. On the contrary, I am a lover and supporter of women (and their anatomical parts). So while your statement is eloquent and obviously forceful enough to inspire the slogan’s removal, there’s still one problem. You completely missed the point. With that said, it doesn’t necessarily pain me to see the slogan disappear. I felt only that I should counter your argument, since apparently no one else was so inspired.

I’ll now share with you a quote from my journalism ethics book (“The Elements of Journalism” by Kovach and Rosenstiel), paraphrasing U of M First Amendment scholar Lee Bollinger: “Out of a diversity of voices the people are more likely to know the truth and thus be able to self-govern.” If this is the end of “the end of pussy journalism,” then let this also be a time to reflect on the nature of some of our newspapers, television and radio stations and other news media, and discard those that do not effectively serve democracy, justice and progress.

Nick Meador

Last week, like many of my fellow journalism students, I received some sad news. One of MSU’s broadcasting teachers, Kim Piper-Aiken, would be leaving after the end of this semester for good. We rallied together and created a Facebook group for support, but it seemed that nothing could be done.

Kim’s decision to leave was her own. But when she was told that her contract would not be renewed based on the work she did with Focal Point, she felt she had little choice. As many of her students have put it, “She basically had a gun to her head.”

Kim was hired to create a broadcast program for the School of Journalism. She invented the weekly news magazine Focal Point and everyone thought that was a great thing for the Journalism School and that the 20-some hours Kim puts in every week: editing, taking phone calls from panicked young reporters and taping the show was good enough to keep her on staff. Unfortunately, Kim has since been told that the Focal Point program does not qualify as creative scholarship and that she would not attain tenure because she had failed to publish enough scholarly research.

But Kim found another job at Wayne State University. She will be spearheading a new Focal Point-like program and will have job-security. So, who really will be affected by her leaving? I’ll tell you who. Us.

Kim has been essential in placing MSU students at such big markets as New York, Las Angeles, Chicago and Washington D.C. for both internships and jobs. She has students in broadcast markets all over the United States as well. Several of her students have gotten internships with ESPN. Now all of that is in jeopardy of being lost.

I understand that MSU is a level one research school, but shouldn’t the university’s, and most definitely the School of Journalism’s, first interest be their students? After all, public and private grant money and alumni donations only gets the university so far. We, the over 40,000 students, are the ones who are paying the university to receive an education. Personally, I feel cheated. The university did not do everything it its power to give me the best education I could receive. The creativity that comes along with clubs and classes like Focal Point is the reason so many students from the J School are bring hired. If the research being done in the J School was saving lives, it would be a different story. Focal was and is a vital part of both the university and the J school. Kim’s only flaw was that she loved teaching too much and put that even in front of her own job security so that so many students could benefit from her instruction. Although, Focal Point will not be gone, necessarily, it will never be the same. Kim, you will be missed.

This editorial is merely to spread awareness that we as students should demand that the right people stay in the right jobs. I know that this same situation has happened many times in many of the university’s different programs. Even the best teachers aren’t protected from leaving, whether or not the students are benefiting from what they learn.

-Jordan Barnes, journalism sophomore & spartanedge.com blog editor

The Lansing State Journal’s Editorial Board recently refused to endorse either Jim Marcinkowski or Mike Rogers as their candidate of choice for the 8th District congressional seat.

Or did they?

Apparantly not. Former Board member Karen Twyman, in a letter published in Wednesday’s City Pulse, said the board’s 5-1 decision to endorse Jim Marcinkowski was quashed by the LSJ’s publisher and president, Leslie Hurst. Twyman also resigned in protest of the decision.

While the ability to refuse the publication of certain material is a necessary aspect of a publisher’s job, the refusal to publish the decision of the editorial board is bizarre. If the publisher is willing to arbitrarily throw out the decisions of the editorial board, then why should there even be one in the LSJ?

More disturbingly, as part of her decision, Hurst duped the LSJ’s audience by printing an editorial which said “the board in good conscience cannot recommend the candidacy of either man”. This was in spite of the fact that 5 of the 6 members of the board were willing, IN GOOD CONSCIENCE, to recommend Jim Marcinkowski.

Hurst reportedly did this as a “compromise” decision as she wanted the LSJ to endorse Mike Rogers.

However, this was not any sort of compromise; it was a hissy fit. Hurst acted as a petulant child, who would rather quit the game than let anyone win. In doing so, Hurst has not only silenced the voice of a trusted mid-Michigan newspaper, but also breached the fragile trust essential between the media and our audience.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated abandonment of her duty as a journalist and community member.

SpartanEdge Publisher Bonnie Bucqueroux says that insiders at the paper have repeatedly questioned Hurst’s news judgment and her understanding of and commitment to the community. There are rumors she alienated the business community and the Greater Lansing Chamber of Commerce roundtable. She reportedly quashed efforts to publish one or more of the Muslim cartoons last year. Many also believe that highly regarded Editor Mark Nixon might not have been as quick to move to a public relations position with the Lansing Board of Water and Light had the newspaper’s commitment to solid journalism been stronger.

If these allegations are true, then Hurst has truly shirked her responsibility to her paper’s audience. She may have had the power to veto the board’s decision, but she cannot be allowed to distort the facts to the community. A journalist’s primary goal is to give the facts to the people, not suppress them and twist them to meet his or her desires.

If she was upset with the editorial board’s decision she should have made a principled decision and published her own endorsement of Mike Rogers, but allowed the decision of her editorial board to stand. Instead it seems she has turned the LSJ’s editorial page into her own personal playground where she makes all the calls, her staff and truth be damned.

Hurst and her employers, the Gannett Corporation have some serious explaining and an apology to give their readers.

SpartanEdge.com Editor Alexander Scott

Dear SpartanEdge readers,

We are the melting pot that went wrong!

Somewhere along the way to multiculturalism, our magical melting pot began boiling over and it is not spewing diversity, but instead hatred. Our magic wand has been lost.

With all due respect to our nation’s “Founding [Purloining] Fathers,” I believe that the first immigrants were the Pilgrims and the others of that era. Why weren’t they expected to learn the languages of this land?

If the argument is that immigrants should assimilate, because they have chosen to come here, then why didn’t Anglo-Saxons struggle to emulate the stereotypical image of the indigenous people, Native Americans? Why weren’t the newly arrived Europeans expected to fulfill the image of paganish, heathens bouncing around a bonfire with feathers?

Wait…as I come to think of it, that is the same image that some European Americans have of Africans, except there is a slight difference – they supposedly are unclothed paganish, heathens bouncing around a bonfire with bananas and monkeys.

Meanwhile, the Asians are supposedly busy doing karate chops around a bon fire, while slinging rice at each other.

And of course, the “unfortunate” Mexicans are the only group without a bon fire. According to some members of American society, Mexicans are too occupied with wading through the waters of el Rio Grande (renamed the Rio Grande River amongst a few prideful English-speakers, though the word river is redundant).

These are simply hateful stereotypes with little to no legitimacy.

The truth is that immigrants, particularly non-northern European immigrants, have worked tirelessly to assimilate, but it is overlooked. The non-white immigrants will never successfully assimilate because they will never have white skin. They will always be considered odd, imperfect or substandard by the quasi-ethnocentric-Anglo-Saxon-measurement system.

By the way, though this letter is not intended to be offensive or inappropriate, it promises to arouse some negative emotions. Therefore, here is my little disclaimer:

This is not a hate letter. I am not a racist. I am not attacking European Americans, but instead I am criticizing anyone (of any ethnicity) who is oblivious to the obvious about “assimilation versus multiculturalism.” In fact, my blood is so diluted that my DNA shares 31 percent European ancestry and notable percentages of other aforementioned ethnicities, according to the Genelex Corporation, an ethnic DNA testing agency.

Moreover, I respect every ethnic and cultural group, but once in a while we, as a society, need a jolt or shock in order for us to escape our comfort zones. Once we step outside of the boundaries of that zone, we begin to realize that our melting pot is not so rosy after all. Nevertheless, we must all pledge to work together and strive for the best that our nation has to offer.

Sincerely,

Ronald Bowman

Freedom of speech. This belief, an ideal so important the Founding Fathers made it the First Amendment to the Constitution, allows SpartanEdge.com and so many other media organizations to exist. The Founders agreed that the most important legal right was that of free speech: to make sure everyone had a voice and equal ability to express their ideals. And because of that, the media have a responsibility to inform the public of all aspects of events around the globe.

Unfortunately, most U.S. media outlets seem to have shirked that responsibility recently.

As many of you know, there is a massive uproar in the Islamic community stemming from a Danish comic portraying the Prophet Mohammed with a bomb in his turban. It is partially based in the idea that it portrays Islam as a violent religion. The greater problem Muslims have with the comic is simply that it portrays the Prophet; personification of the Prophet is a sin to Muslims.

As a result of the anger over these comics, numerous businesses have been burned, violent riots have erupted and many people have been killed.

The media in the US, protected by the First Amendment, have spent many hours covering these riots, showing burning businesses and the signs of the protesters, some of which call for the beheading of the cartoonists.

However, these media outlets have almost unanimously NOT published or shown the cartoons, claiming that they do not wish to disrespect Islam. While it is admirable to not offend anyone, homogenized thought is not the reason Americans were given the First Amendment.

The First Amendment was created so that everyone would be free to think and voice their own thoughts. It was made to guarantee all sides of an issue could be heard, to improve democracy. It was made to guarantee a government of the people and for the people.

Certainly not all people would agree upon certain ideas, but without those free ideas, the Founders could not make a democracy.

The media has one of the greatest responsibilities in protecting this idea: To make sure all people have the facts to make their own decision on issues. Only people who have all the facts can make a true democracy; if their ideas are dictated to them, then it is tyranny at the most basic level.

In this comic controversy, the vast majority of the media have neglected that responsibility.

Out of their “respect” for Islam, they do not print the comics.

However, why is that “respect” not granted to others?

The media publish recipes for pork and shellfish; it is against the religious rules of Judaism to consume those products, so why isn’t there a censorship of that in the interest of “respect”?

The media publish pictures of the Amish, in spite of their beliefs against having their pictures taken. Where is the media’s “respect” for their beliefs?

The media aired various parts of the videotape of Nicholas Berg’s beheading and the pictures of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Where was the “respect” for the privacy and dignity of these people?

But the artistically benign comics that have set off riots resulting in many deaths are unacceptable to publish out of “respect” for Islam? Suicide bombers and Osama Bin Laden are more visceral insults toward the values of Islam, yet they and their results are shown regularly.

Admittedly, the print and broadcast media do have a rationale for not showing the comics: anyone who tunes in or flips the pages would be forced to see the evil cartoons and that person could be offended by it.

SpartanEdge.com has the advantage of the Internet. We have the ability to show the images to people who consciously click the link to the page containing them. We can make the comics available to those who wish to see what has caused all these problems and hide them from those who would be offended.

And we have chosen to use that tool unique to the Internet. You have the choice to view the comics. You have the choice to avoid being offended.

Many major media outlets that have refused to print or air the comics also have Web sites where they could do the same as we have. However, they choose to keep the public uninformed in that arena as well.

Cherry-picking images and information is why public trust of the media is at an all-time low and it is a deserved fate for not following the obligation to distribute the facts.

While we may not agree with everything another group says, the moment we censor their speech is the moment we silence our own. The day we prevent information from being distributed and viewed is the day we embrace ignorance. And when we lay down the sword and stop defending ideological freedom, the foundation of America will shatter where the blade rests.

The mainstream media has dropped the sword; SpartanEdge.com now wields it.

SpartanEdge.com Editor Alexander Scott