Monday, July 23, 2007
Bleh
The "Editor's blog" for the Daily Cal kinda-sorta addresses their unsigned op-ed policy. It doesn't actually respond to any of the criticism I raise, though. Instead, it just says "trust us!"
Couldn't the same points have been raised by the organization itself? Unanswered. Did the writer have any proof (or does it even make sense) that he was rejected from certain positions, but accepted for others, based on his immigration status? Unanswered.
There were a number of students in this organization who publicly protested, after all. How absolutely essential was their need for secrecy? Who is going to commit these hate crimes the writer is so afraid of?
The fact is that none of the writer's message that is "important and timely," or that provides a "perspective that is not always seen" was unique to this writer, and has been expressed by numerous people who do name themselves. Publishing an anonymous op-ed simply to increase the drama value ("Waaah! I lost my architect dream!!!" which was the only part of the op-ed which was actually specific to the writer, and could easily have been described by a named representative of RISE), especially when the anonymity itself would increase the drama value ("Waaah! If my name is known, I'll be in danger!!!"), seems like the sort of motive that the editors should've challenged, according to their precious Code of Ethics.
. . .
|
. . .
|
