Julie R. Neidlinger: Lone Prairie Blog

College newspapers and their editorial stances.

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 0 comments link this post

The actions of just one student are "proof positive" of a campus-wide problem.

That is, according to University of North Dakota's Dakota Student newspaper. Gary LaPointe, a Native American student, left UND because of the nickname controversy. This is not a blog post about that larger nickname debate, but one of how the Dakota Student saw fit to take an editorial stance based on one student's experience, and the corresponding online responses to his story, and call the entire university "hostile and abusive."

If this logic is to be followed, what does it say about the university when a random student leaves because she's pregnant, because he can't afford to pay the tuition, because she transferred, because he got a job? What broad statement can we make? Though these stories surely occur more than a student leaving because of the nickname, they aren't nearly as attention-grabbing. Plus, it would mean a new editorial stance nearly every week.

The problem with basing any opinion on such a small pool of evidence, including the online responses, is that you come off looking mighty stupid. Online responses and polls are notoriously unreliable; your pool is limited to those with online access, those with a propensity for responding, and those with an unusual amount of vitriole. This is not an all-encompassing pool, nor remotely scientific, from which to make a broad editorial stance.

Didn't you know it wasn't news unless it grabbed attention? That's the lesson being taught to the up-and-coming journalists, evidently. No one wants to read about parking meters unless Paul Newman is out front, cutting their tops off. Then it's news. Then the story has crossed that magic line of plain, old, boring news and into the world of adjectives and tear-jerking and editorial stances.

This topic of student newspapers and the constant controversy and inflammatory quality of every little thing that ends up being written by university students was something I addressed in an earlier post. I stated that I agreed with something Craig, over at Lead and Gold, had addressed regarding these budding journalists: forget about being a journalist and pay your dues by being a local beat reporter instead.

These students would do well to take into account the things mentioned by Molly Ivins in that earlier post of mine and Craig's. Instead of banding unheroically together to take an "editorial stance" on such a flimsy foundation, they might try digging up some real news, they might try a few excruciating interviews of people who answer in mono-syllables and animosity in an effort to put flesh on a bones-only story and see where it takes them. Then, when they've gotten to see the unfun and often unexciting reality of reporting on real stuff, they might not be so prone to broad statements painted by a worn-out brush.

I would also suggest not using the logic of someone being "a real person, with real feelings" as a means of proving a point. Every person is real, and with real feelings, including those who might disagree with the stance in question.

The Lone Prairie editorial stance? You're not a real journalist until you've received a 6 a.m. phone call by the head of the sanitation department, enraged by an error you made in your article on the new town recycling project. These students have to learn how to accept money in exchange for being bored and the very real benefit that that does for the public, as opposed to writing the next juicy, inflammatory, opinion-addled dollop of words that informs less than it inflames.

Hat Tip: Thanks to the blog Grand Forks Life, I found out about the silly editorial stance by the student newspaper. The comments section of the GFL blog cuts to the chase fairly quickly.