The public editor is supposed to enlighten campus controversies, but this semester perhaps my most meaningful contribution has instead been to start one.
Last week, the Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate denied me the $500 salary I was supposed to earn this year as public editor. I have done my best to remain silent on coverage of the Senate this semester, since my perspective is clouded by my having served as TCU president last school year. I have also hoped to let my work define the public editor instead of doing so explicitly, since this role is still a Tufts experiment. But since the spotlight has now turned away from the media and onto me, I will use this op-ed to share my view on the future of the position.
My goal as public editor is to elevate the level of discourse around campus media, both by reflecting on obvious controversies and exposing details that might otherwise be overlooked. We hold our student government leaders accountable through elections, and most students interact with their media far more than with the TCU — we read the Daily every morning, not Senate resolutions. How do we hold campus media accountable?
In the past, the only suggestion I heard was to cut a publication's funding if it published something offensive. This is no way to solve problems. The public editor cannot and should not make campus controversies disappear, but he or she should be a constant watchdog who can contribute a wise, authoritative voice. As the Daily noted in its Nov. 12 editorial, this responsibility is a job unlike other those of columnists or editors, even if the time and energy requirements are smaller.
I am humbled by the Media Advocacy Board's confidence in me. But I also know I would not feel comfortable in this position without the experience I have in media on and off campus, or without my deep connections to the Tufts community. With all respect to freshmen and sophomores, I believe only upperclassmen have the resources it takes to be an effective public editor. Many juniors go abroad, and seniors have little incentive to take on new activities unless they are paid — I never would have considered applying if there weren't a paycheck.
I value the role of the public editor, and I know that money adds value and prestige to the position. Now that the position is unpaid, I fear it will not be the authoritative voice on campus media it should be.
I have decided not to serve as public editor next semester. I am not resigning out of protest, but I am quitting after a semester because I think my voice has been heard on a number of important issues and I want to hear another perspective. These reasons are true, but it is also true that I would be more inclined to think harder about future op-eds if there were a check in it for me at the end.
If you want to be public editor next semester, stay tuned for applications from the Media Advocacy Board. I'll post a link in an upcoming op-ed and on the Tufts Roundtable. But be warned: There are a lot of perks to this job, but money is no longer one of them.
--
Duncan Pickard is a senior majoring in history. He is the Public Editor of the Media Advocacy Board and his opinions are strictly his own. He can be reached at tuftspubliceditor@gmail.com or through his blog at www.tuftsroundtable.org/publiceditor.
