2008 Woodie Awards
Response to LTE
Michael Lutkenhouse
Issue date: 4/13/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 3 next >
Mr. Peled,
I must say I'm rather shocked by the stance you take here and I'm at a loss as to where to begin. First and foremost seems to be your assertion that the Stute's purpose is to promote the school when you say "I thought the school paper had something to do with contributing to the pride of the school and respectability of it." I would be able to understand such feelings being attached to the SGA Publicity committee, which you indicate in your signature you're a member of. However I have trouble understanding how it is you think The Stute, part of whose stated purpose reads "serve the needs of the Stevens Community by printing news and announcements relevant, or of interest to that community and serving as a medium for free and open student expression," is to do nothing more than promote the school.
The very belief that The Stute is just here to promote "the pride of the school and respectability" suggests that we should not have covered issues such as the deficit and calls into question every editorial which is critical of decisions made. Our purpose is not to blindly follow those orders from the powers be, rather our primary purpose is to inform our readers of the news and allow them to form their opinions.
The letter you wrote continues on to call into question our printing of public information; the names of those arrested and their affiliations. The simple fact is that this is public information and it is my firm belief that the editors of a newspaper should not take it upon themselves to deprive their readers of information that is publicly accessible. A quick survey of news congregate sites indicates that on a regular basis other professional news services print stories of teachers who had inappropriate relations with students. These services print not only the names of the teacher but, at times, the photo as well. You say that I am tasteless for printing their names, than what about those who print the photos? Are we to forget that as adults we are responsible for our actions? Are you going to condemn every news organization that has reported on ongoing investigations while including the names of those under investigation, even one including the name of a teacher who had inappropriate relations with a student? Was the news service wrong to cover the OJ Simpson case? You blindly state supervision is needed to prevent "misconceptions about what professional journalism really is" but yet I am able to point to almost every news organization having done the exact same thing. I do not appreciate someone who describes himself as "not a professional journalist in any way, shape or form" taking his misconstrued conception of what a journalist should be and applying it to someone who is. Murray I. Gurfein, a federal judge, said on the issue "A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press, must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the right of the people to know."
I must say I'm rather shocked by the stance you take here and I'm at a loss as to where to begin. First and foremost seems to be your assertion that the Stute's purpose is to promote the school when you say "I thought the school paper had something to do with contributing to the pride of the school and respectability of it." I would be able to understand such feelings being attached to the SGA Publicity committee, which you indicate in your signature you're a member of. However I have trouble understanding how it is you think The Stute, part of whose stated purpose reads "serve the needs of the Stevens Community by printing news and announcements relevant, or of interest to that community and serving as a medium for free and open student expression," is to do nothing more than promote the school.
The very belief that The Stute is just here to promote "the pride of the school and respectability" suggests that we should not have covered issues such as the deficit and calls into question every editorial which is critical of decisions made. Our purpose is not to blindly follow those orders from the powers be, rather our primary purpose is to inform our readers of the news and allow them to form their opinions.
The letter you wrote continues on to call into question our printing of public information; the names of those arrested and their affiliations. The simple fact is that this is public information and it is my firm belief that the editors of a newspaper should not take it upon themselves to deprive their readers of information that is publicly accessible. A quick survey of news congregate sites indicates that on a regular basis other professional news services print stories of teachers who had inappropriate relations with students. These services print not only the names of the teacher but, at times, the photo as well. You say that I am tasteless for printing their names, than what about those who print the photos? Are we to forget that as adults we are responsible for our actions? Are you going to condemn every news organization that has reported on ongoing investigations while including the names of those under investigation, even one including the name of a teacher who had inappropriate relations with a student? Was the news service wrong to cover the OJ Simpson case? You blindly state supervision is needed to prevent "misconceptions about what professional journalism really is" but yet I am able to point to almost every news organization having done the exact same thing. I do not appreciate someone who describes himself as "not a professional journalist in any way, shape or form" taking his misconstrued conception of what a journalist should be and applying it to someone who is. Murray I. Gurfein, a federal judge, said on the issue "A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press, must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the right of the people to know."
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
Kim Dikovics
posted 4/16/07 @ 9:29 PM EST
A little confrontational, but a necessary response nonetheless. People have to realize that what is true is not always going to be pleasant. Besides, had the three people mentioned not been allegedly doing something illegal, they never would have been arrested, and never would have had their names printed in the paper. (Continued…)
680995DD-1503-40B7-A967-96142C113AB3
Imran
posted 4/17/07 @ 10:33 PM EST
This was discarded the first time I tried to post it. Therefor I'd like to also note that its fairly hypocritical to blather on and on about freedom of speech then deny comments that you don't agree with, or indeed even to censor comments on articles at all. (Continued…)
Grant
posted 5/23/07 @ 6:15 AM EST
Ms. Dikovics, I regretfully must say that I disagree with some of your assertions. Firstly, I don't deem the above a necessary response, as you claim: unless your surname starts with L and ends in utkenhouse, you're not in a position to make that decision, so why did you? Have the criticisms of Mrs Pfeffer & Lutkenhouse offended you in some way?
You are absolutely correct to say that, had the students involved not allegedly been doing something illegal, nothing would have happened. (Continued…)
Grant
posted 5/23/07 @ 8:24 AM EST
Mr. Lutkenhouse's response, which actually reads more like a rebuttal, is mostly agreeable to me: this is unsurprising, considering that's likely how it is intended to read. (Continued…)
Post a Comment