On Sept. 2, The New York Times ran a front-page article entitled "Palin Disclosures Raise Questions on Vetting," touching off a media controversy on the negative coverage surrounding John McCain's (R-Ariz.) pick for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska). Predictably, the Times' Web site was bombarded by comments alleging liberal bias — 1,068 at last count — and irate letters to the editor filled the next day's opinion papers. Readers clearly had a lot to say, but aside from short letters and talking heads on conservative television shows, they had little way of expressing their frustration.
As a journalist at Tufts, I often feel insulated from the kind of pressures that shape the news in the "real world." I'm the editor of the Tufts Observer and it can be hard to remember that the words we print are read — that they mean something and might even offend somebody. We hear reactions to our work all the time: on our Web site, through word of mouth and in the rare letter to the editor. But if we were to publish something really nasty — something downright offensive — I realize that readers would have no one to turn to to air their complaints.
Unfortunately, Tufts is no stranger to offensive speech. In the aftermath of the publication of a racist Christmas carol in 2006, students struggled to confront the competing priorities of fairness and freedom of speech. Since the incident, President Lawrence Bacow has charged the administration with formulating an official stance on freedom of expression — but students have done little to stake their claim in the on-campus debate over free speech. We've talked a lot about it, but there is still no avenue with which to address issues of offensive speech, no public forum to turn to if a student feels violated by his peers' published work.
When the readers of The New York Times are frustrated, they have an authority higher than Internet message boards to appeal to. The Times' Public Editor, Clark Hoyt, is charged with writing a weekly column that represents the readers' opinions and his own judgment on matters of journalistic ethics. Mr. Hoyt is affiliated with the paper but writes independently about a topic of his choosing each week, exploring each side of the argument and ultimately offering his own opinion on what the newspaper should or shouldn't have printed.
It's time for students to draw the boundaries of acceptable expression. To that end, I am proud to announce the creation of a similar public editor position at Tufts.
The public editor will serve as the readers' representative-a critical voice that publicly speaks to campus publications on behalf of the Tufts community. Articles written by the editor will appear regularly on the Tufts media Web site at http://ase.tufts.edu/media and any publication will have the option of publishing the editor's opinion in print. All current and recently graduated (2006 and later) undergraduate and graduate students are eligible for the position.
When the Times' public editor responded to the Sarah Palin article, he ended up respectfully disagreeing with many readers. He wrote, "The drip-drip-drip of these stories seems like partisanship to Palin's partisans. But they fill out the picture of who she is." We want a public editor with similar independence. The opinions of the editor will be his or her own but ought to represent the concerns and attitudes of the Tufts community. The editor will not be alone in his or her job. Neil Swidey (LA '91) a writer for the Boston Globe Magazine, has agreed to coach the editor through the difficult dilemmas he or she may face as the media community's ombudsman.
The editor's columns could be about content deemed offensive, violations of journalistic ethics or charges of bias. Beyond this, the public editor could field and address the legitimacy of complaints or concerns that are raised about the student media. This editor will not serve as a punitive judge. He or she will serve as the "conscience" of the student media and as a public mechanism for accountability and high-quality journalism within the university community.
The public editor project has been developed with input from the Tufts Daily, Tufts Observer, Primary Source, Forum, Zamboni, Onyx and others. This is a position that we want to have, and we want you, the readers, to fill it. I encourage any student or member of the Tufts community who is interested in media accountability, journalism or just thinks he or she has what it takes to speak for the Tufts community.
With the creation of this position, we hope to facilitate a discussion of journalism ethics while working to improve the quality of public discourse on campus. Our plan is to set up a mechanism to encourage accountability, self-regulation and valuable experience for would-be journalists. A periodically published critique should enrich the public debate at Tufts without constraining any publication's freedom of expression. With this proposal we hope to enhance and deepen the already vibrant community of journalists at Tufts.
And we want you. Learn more and apply online at http://ase.tufts.edu/media. Be a fair, critical voice, and speak on behalf of the student body. Be heard. Be Tufts' first public editor.
Patrick Roath is a senior majoring in International Relations. He is currently the chair of the Media Advisory Board (MAB) and the editor-in-chief of the Tufts Observer.
