Several Fridays ago, a friend inquired if I had had the chance to read the day’s news. I told him I hadn’t. Truth be told, I had not even expected to read Student Life’s news pages. But I also didn’t want to burst his bubble. So I asked if any particularly interesting stories had made the paper. He replied by mentioning that Student Life had run an article on the Wilderness Project and asked if I was familiar with the program. I wasn’t, which surprised him. Turns out my younger brother had been involved in the early planning stages of the Outing Club’s pre-orientation program.
He then continued by saying, happily, that the best thing about the article was that the paper had actually quoted him correctly! He had told the reporter what he thought and she had transcribed his precise words! I chuckled and asked, almost in disbelief, “Student Life? Really?” He smiled and said that he had been misquoted in the past, but not this time. I told him I was sorry and that the reporter was probably new: “She doesn’t yet know that she’s supposed to make mistakes.” Laughs all around.
But Student Life’s (many) defects ought not be stand-up material. They ought to be remedied, by staff and students alike. Published in a recent issue, Doug Burns’ suggestions for the paper and its staff are a good place to begin. First, cut out the fluff. Student Life need not run a front page “news story” on power outages in Eliot-the overwhelming majority of students already knew about the unfortunate incident. And instead of devoting valuable space to CS40’s expenditures on a recent formal, how about covering Dick Gephardt’s announcement that he is running for President of the United States. Most Washington University students, need I remind the editor in chief, live in his congressional district.
Second, replace the filler. Nearly all the articles in WU’s student newspaper ought to be written by-I know this is a radical notion-WU students. The paper thus ought not to publish news articles from electronic wire services.
Third, cover student activism. A greater percentage of news articles ought to address the various efforts students and campus organizations make on and off campus to better our world. I’d love, for example, to read an article on the impact social work practicum projects have on the St. Louis community. Or how the law school’s interdisciplinary environmental clinic (at which a roommate of mine recently worked) is this year promoting environmental protection.
Fourth, drastically limit-or better yet, totally eliminate-inaccuracies. Fact-check and spell-check. Research and redraft. And make sure that what is written on the page makes sense. The “Urban Scholars[hip]” program sure doesn’t. Opposite this page, Asha Haji complains that a recent Student Life news piece described her as an “Urban Scholar” rather than an “Ervin Scholar.” The Ervin Scholarship initiative is a highly selective program designed to attract the nation’s best and brightest black high school students (many of whom I now consider my friends) to WU. The “Urban Scholars[hip] Program,” which Student Life reports “grants black students academic merit-based scholarships,” doesn’t exist.
The mix-up is sort of understandable. Sort of. “Ervin” sounds a lot like “urban,” and an uniformed reporter might mistake one for the other over the telephone. But educated editors ought to know better, especially given the plethora of opinions published about the scholarship last November. And the consequences.
The “Urban Scholars[hip] Program” makes a nationally competitive scholarship that brings students to WU who would otherwise go to Harvard, Yale and Stanford sound like welfare, private education style. White suburban university assists needy urban black kids. Give me a break. The mistake is so ridiculous there is little I could do but laugh. As I did earlier.
But just as Student Life ought to shape up, so too must lifeless students. In the past several weeks, I’ve noticed a marked increase in the number of complaints about the paper. Some argue it poorly reports sports scores and statistics. Others complain about its editorial policy, which gives preference to opinions written about campus issues above those addressing international affairs. And many-myself included, because I am somehow signed up four times-protest our inability to unsubscribe from Student Life’s e-mail list. But as the criticism pours in, constructive assistance does not. Students complain about the paper, but few volunteer to better its condition.
Two years ago, after having had words put into my mouth by several different Student Life reporters, I jumped on the opportunity to never be misquoted again. How? I accepted an invitation to serve as an opinion editor. Student Life, aiming to prevent conflicts of interest and opportunities for self-aggrandizement, has a policy prohibiting reporters from quoting other staff members in news pieces. In the belly of the beast, I was thus safe from slander.
But as I prepare to soon leave the paper (Student Life is now accepting applications for my position, as well as other staff opportunities), I have begun to think about how I might ensure that I am-and others are-not misquoted anymore. I realized after but a moment’s reflection that I couldn’t accomplish my mission alone. So it goes for those who remain and will come after me on staff. Student Life will always be as lifeless, or as lively, as Washington University students themselves.