OCR Text |
Show Page 5 The Signpost Wednesday, December 8,2004 Editorial Editor-in-Chief: Natalie Clemens Phone: 626-7121 VIEWPOINT Shoddy journalism is not the norm Jayson Blair, Stephen Glass, Dan Rather, Bill O'Reilly. These are the names that send any responsible journalist straight to the therapist for a five-hour couch session. However, these are also the names that stick in the public mind as a counterfeit representation of what all journalists are. It seems that it's always the most vocal and the most irresponsible out of a group who get the most attention, and journalists are no exception. Whether or not Rather intentionally used shaky evidence to bash President Bush's National Guard service is debatable. However, the fact that Rather was sloppy is not. One would think someone with as much experience as Rather would check memos more carefully before breaking a big story. Now as he finds himself retiring as CBS news anchor, he is the subject of much public scrutiny. Speaking of scrutiny, Bill O'Reilly's egomaniacal editorializing can be found in every one of his O'Reilly Factor programs. "The No Spin Zone" makes viewers' heads spin so fast they might upchuck their recently consumed freedom fries. Journalistic objectivity is bumped aside to make room for O'Reilly's millionth plug of his book, "Who's Looking Out for You," and yet he still finds the nerve to call himself a journalist. If sloppy journalism and editorializing isn't enough to make any selfrespecting journalist cringe, how about outright lying? Jayson Blair plagiarized quotes and made up material for the New York Times. Stephen Glass made his fictitious contributions to The New Republic. Glass recently wrote a book, "The Fabulist," detailing his life. Perhaps he should collaborate with Blair to write, "Who's Looking Out for You? Not Us." No student enters into the field of journalism to win a popularity contest. Journalists share the same social slot as lawyers - one millimeter above the untouchable caste in India. The shoddy work that some well-known reporters produce ensures that that perception will remain intact unless the public recognizes that most journalists are there to serve the public, not themselves. - The Signpost Editorial Board The -.^ A Weber vveuer State oiaie University university Signpost Editor-in-Chief Managing Editor News Editor Sports Editor Copy Editor Features Editor Entertainment Editor Business Editor Photo Editor Graphics Editor Online Editor Advertising Manager Office Manager Advisior Distribution Publisher Signpost Fax Natalie Clemens Maria Villasenor Shane Farver Ryan Howe William Hampton Roy Pyatt Colleen Batchelor Candice Dallin Mo Williams Samuel T. Platt David Adams Devon Crus Georgia Edwards Allison Hess William Hampton Dr. Randy Scott 626-7121 626-7614 626-7655 626-7983 626-7659 626-7621 626-7105 626-7624 626-6358 626-7661 626-6358 626-6359 626-7974 626-7499 626-7974 626-6464 626-7401 The Signpost is published every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday during the semester. Subscription is $9 a semester. The first copy of The Signpost is free, each additional copy is $.50. • The Signpost is a student publication, written, edited and drafted by Weber State University students. Student fees partially fund the printing of this publication. Opinions or positions voiced are not necessarily endorsed by the university. • The Signpost welcomes letters to the editor. Letters must include name, address, telephone number and the writer's signature. Anonymous letters will not be printed. • The Signpost reserves the right to edit letters for reasons of space and libel and aiso reserves the right to refuse to print any letter. Letters should not exceed 350 words. Bring letters to the editorial office In SUB 267, mail to; The Signpost, Weber State University, Ogden, Utah, 84408-2110. Attn: Editor in Chief, email thesignpost@weber.edu Letters to the Editor Diversity, the intrepid unifier Diversity is you, whether you like to see it that way or not. You are different from anyone who has ever been or will ever be. That's what makes you interesting. No one can excuse himself or herself from this absolute truth. Even DNA testifies of our diversity and our similarities. That is diversity worth understanding. It is not the responsibility of the minority to uphold diversity's central principles. Diversity is not a black thing. At the center of diversity is the responsibility of each individual to unconditionally recognize each other's unique and cherished contributions to humanity. To call diversity separatist is a gross misrepresentation of the concept, when at its core, it is an intrepid unifier. Separatism comes when we begin to assume we have nothing in common. Someone once said, "We are more diverse on the inside than we are on the outside." I truly believe this. I beg to differ with anyone who says that diversity is divisive and unworthy of his or her consideration and reflection. That is pure and refined arrogance. Diversity is a concept that requires critical thinking, and it is only for those who want to understand and find creative solutions to many of our human imperfections. It is as necessary as, say, effective communication. For instance, pick a friends brain about the issue of religion, creation, abortion or any issue that matters to you. I assure you no one on the planet thinks about it exactly like you do, even those who most closely believe like you. Why does Weber Slate University value (he importance of having special constituency senator seats for students who are not represented on campus? WSU values diversity and all of its students' and staff's perspectives. Imagine, if you will, a Caucasian Mormon attending Howard University in Washington, D.C. (a known historically black university which many white students choose to attend). As a Mormon, you deserve to be respected and represented like all of the other students. So what is a culturally competent staff and student body to do? Administrators ask the student and staff to critically think about how they might create an environment of inclusion that (this student) might feel welcome and valued. They might ask, "How do we retain them and help them succeed?" They apply the same standard and questions they ask about the majority group on campus to the minority group. What better way than to create a student-led position with a voice that represents all the good things about their Mormon students (be it two or 20) - its culture, its values and its beliefs to be respected and appreciated. These positions may seem unnecessary to some, but I assure you that to the small group of Native American or Asian students on campus, it is a direct way of saying: "We value your diverse contributions and want to learn from you enough to give you a legal and valid influence on a campus that is characterized by its dominant group." Hypothetically slapping your brothers and sisters in the face is not the way to communicate or advocate effective change. If you don't like something, you can voice it, but at least think beyond the surface of the issue at hand. More importantly, think about how you will maintain a respectful relationship before you speak or write. I low is it that diversity requirements are ridiculous, illogical, ludicrous, bizarre and absurd? By saying diversity requirements are absurd, you are saying they are all these others. In an increasingly diverse culture like American culture (which happens to champion diversity as our strength), it would be negligent for us all to not try to understand those who are not like us. After all, your next boss might hold two Ph. D.s, be a woman who is black and Asian, originally from Japan but raised in the Middle East, a practicing Buddhist, who is politically committed to conservative democracy, a mother of two, who outranks your degrees and experience. This may seem outlandish but possible. What could we possibly learn from her? The way to bring us together is to worship, to sing, to eat, to talk, to listen, to educate, to learn, to respect, to cry and to laugh with each other. That's the true picture of diversity. The paradox? Diversity is a unifier. At diversity's foundation is the practice of compassion and humility in our communal ignorance. All of us are wrong sometimes and we must be humble enough to admit it in order to learn. - Keith R. Wilder WSU coordinator of Diversity Center and Leadership Programs In response to a Viewpoint written Nov. 24 by Scott Allen titled "Campus Diversity Is Segregation." s " it i • * |