As members of the student publication community, our worth and well-being as journalists is directly dependent upon the amount of respect and access we receive from the University and our ability to get the interviews and information we need.
With all of the new propositions and changes coming to the University, student journalists from seemingly every publication are trying to get the complete story.
We’re hitting some unnecessary brick walls, however, in our pursuit to establish what these propositions and changes mean to our university.
As a result, it takes us much longer to actually get the full scoop than it should, affecting the student body’s ability to make a rational decision on a timely manner.
What’s more, it makes it seem as though the members of the student publication are “late,” or “out of the loop,” when we’ve been doing everything in our power to get the story.
A journalist is nothing without the ability to collect information from a community in an efficient manner.
Our University should be embracing our efforts and be granting us the transparency and availability we need to give the student body the content that matters to them.
Last week, in a journalism interview class, University President Richard Lariviere was questioned on his denial of an interview with the Oregon Commentator’s Alex Tomchak Scott.
Lariviere proceeded to call the Commentator “sophomoric” and an embarrassment, saying that he only makes time for things that further the mission of the University.
Interestingly, in that same interview, Lariviere lauded the efforts of Oregon Daily Emerald reporter Stefan Verbano in covering issues related to higher education and the University administration.
That same day, Lariviere was tentatively scheduled to have an interview with Verbano about the construction of the new Oregon Research Institute Building, but he was informed that the President had no comment and referred to another administrator instead.
Julie Brown, University communications director, said in an e-mail to Verbano, “the president isn’t available and doesn’t have additional information to provide.”
So, Lariviere refuses to meet with the Commentator because it is “sophomoric,” but why isn’t he speaking to the reporter with whom he said he respects his work?
The University must grant us the interviews and information we need to keep the student body in the know, no matter what the nature of the student publication.
Regardless if it is the Commentator, the Oregon Daily Emerald, or any of the other myriad campus publications, our status as student groups absolutely furthers the mission of the University — “to question critically, think logically, communicate clearly, act creatively, and live ethically.”
The University’s leaders seem so concerned with saying the wrong thing or looking unprofessional that they would rather the students not be updated with University happenings.
Because they are the people we pay to educate us and create an environment in which we can be educated, they have no right to withhold information and give watchdogs the wraparound.
Yes, we are college students, but above that, we, the student publication community, are young professionals trying to keep our peers informed on the happenings of campus — and to provide the facts and viewpoints necessary to craft informed opinions about those issues that affect them.
Withholding information from us is withholding information from all.
[email protected]
Editorial: University shouldn’t keep students in the dark
Daily Emerald
February 20, 2011
0
More to Discover