Readers of this page may have noticed a dialogue this week between Army Feth, a columnist for the Emerald, and Anthony Warren, chairman of the College Republicans. Warren criticized Feth on Wednesday for “misrepresenting herself” as an Emerald reporter writing an objective new report (“Emerald columnist proves herself unethical, irresponsible journalist,” ODE 2006). Feth replied on Thursday, challenging his claims (“UO College Republicans president’s commentary filled with inaccuracies,” ODE 2006).
This exchange may have raised eyebrows because it deviated from our standard lineup of columns, political cartoons and editorials; I would like to address this issue and briefly discuss the role of the Commentary page.
Some newspapers have recently pitched online blogs as “news as a conversation.” The Commentary section also serves as a conversation between readers, through letters to the editor, guest commentaries and the Emerald staff, through columns and editorials. Commentary articles are often critical, raising issues so that they may be addressed for the common good.
But like the recent scuttlebutt surrounding The Washington Post’s decision to shutdown its blog feedback system, newspaper editors often face a quandary: What should they do when readers are critical not of staff members’ opinions, but of staff members themselves? Such was the case this week.
Our columnists appreciate the privilege to write for the University audience and to share their views. Yet at the same time, it requires fortitude and self-confidence to share ideas with peers, professors and community members with the knowledge that they may respond critically.
Did we publish material in this case more critical of our columnist than what our columnists generally publish about others? Perhaps. But it is vital to be willing to scrutinize our own actions as well as those of local and national entities.
This scrutiny can lead to learning, a key part of the Emerald’s mission. As Feth said on Thursday, she realized that she might have avoided the situation by stating she was a columnist and not merely an Emerald employee. While perhaps she could have been clearer, I stand behind Feth in asserting that she acted in a proper manner by identifying herself as a journalist.
The Emerald staff will continue to fulfill our mission of creating a professional paper and improving as journalists. I hope readers will continue to participate in this process.
Many readers have already taken the opportunity to participate in our ongoing conversation, and I hope future dialogue will continue to be productive.
[email protected]