Letter to the Editor

I want to highlight the absence of journalistic integrity in an opinion piece in the 7th issue of The College Voice, “Playing Off the Ice”. The utter lack of source vetting, thorough research, balanced interviewing, and clarity regarding potentially criminal accusations represents the journalistic differences separating The New York Times from The National Inquirer.

At a College Voice open meeting, Aparna Gopalan, an Opinions Editor, presented a pitch regarding a controversy surrounding the Green Dot hockey game and players involved. When no one volunteered, the Op-Editors emailed all published Op-Ed writers at Conn. An email excerpt containing the “terribly exciting” pitch, is shown here:

“Green Dot Hockey Game – apparently, there are people involved in the game who have little to do with Green Dot but cash in on the event. Explore the controversy! (We have a great source for whoever writes this)”

The following day, Ethan Underhill, SGA President, emailed a response expressing his concerns regarding the pitch, “[It implies] the only people who possess the capacity to spread a message or change our institution for the better are the ones who put in the hours organizing events themselves….The positive image around a person/club/department/organization is simply a secondary effect of a decision that continues the mission of something downright awesome.”

That evening, the Op-Editors wrote back, “The pitch…was based off our conversation with a student who…approached us and told us about her not-so-great experiences with the Green Dot hockey game and some of the players last year…Pitches do not represent our opinions as editors.”

Again, no one volunteered and Op-Editor Dakota Peschel took on the pitch himself. What ensued was the article in the 7th issue, Playing Off the Ice.

Before I continue, I must explicitly state I am not on the hockey team and am not Green Dot trained. I write neither in support nor condemnation of either entity. I am not judging the honesty of Peschel’s source. To be victimized by sexual harassment is horribly terrorizing and we should all aspire to uphold the Green Dot mission. My greatest fear is that Peschel’s article will cause future victims to hesitate to come forward because they assume a cavalier relationship between Green Dot and sexual assault.

Peschel calls his opinion piece an “investigation”. The definition of investigation is: a searching inquiry for ascertaining facts. Peschel cites an unverified source. He directly labels the perpetrators as “hockey players”, yet provides no names, confidential or otherwise. Without specifying dates, Peschel accuses team members of unexplained actions which fail to provide evidence of harassment. It seems reasonable in an investigation, to assume Peschel interviewed members of the team – the accused. I learned from the Green Dot Hockey captains, Tom Conlin and Will Leedy, no players were contacted. Furthermore, they confirmed, to their knowledge, no current team members have previously been or currently are subjects of a harassment investigation.

Investigative journalism requires thorough research when discussing such serious topics like sexual assault or harassment. Journalists need verifiable sources, dates, and actions. Additionally, emails from the Op-Editors to Underhill state, “the not-so-great experiences with…some of the players” took place last year which Peschel withholds. This infers the accused are current members of the team and community. Printing broad and accusatory claims of harassment without detailed investigation is egregious. After exposing the research done for this author-coined investigation, it is improper to label it anything except libelous.

The final product derives from a pitch proposed by one Op-Editor then written by the other Op-Editor, contradicting previous email statements, “pitches do not represent our opinions as editors”. The piece is an Op-Editor’s opinion who self-labeled an investigation. Moreover, emails from the Op-Editors to Underhill characterize the event as a “not-so-great” experience, differing drastically from the printed claim, “I was harassed.”

Peschel quotes Darcie Folsom, Director of Sexual Violence Prevention and Advocacy,  “1/3 of the team has been through Green Dot training,” then says, “I was initially surprised the number was so low, but considering the number of non-athletic students who are Green Dot trained, this number seemed to be an accurate reflection of our campus at large.” Of the 1,922 students at Conn, 398 (21%) are Green Dot trained. The Green Dot National Organization’s stated “critical mass”  is to train 10-20% of the student body. 10 of 32 (31%) members of the Men’s Hockey Team are Green Dot trained. According to those numbers, the Men’s Hockey Team not only surpasses the National Organization’s benchmark, but proportionally has more players trained than the entire campus. Peschel was informed 5 players were signed up for training in January, but Folsom had to cancel for personal reasons. Peschel knew this and withheld it from his piece. The cancellation was noted in another article in that publication, but edited out by an unknown editor.

As Editors, Gopalan, Peschel, and Ayla Zuraw-Friedland must uphold the guidelines of journalistic integrity. There has to be some sort of fact-based information to support these types of potentially criminal claims. Otherwise, the line of defamation is toed. As Op-Editors, Gopalan and Peschel are accountable for content published in their section. As Editor-in-Chief, Zuraw-Friedland is accountable for all content published in The College Voice. While their intent may have been otherwise, they have all acted irresponsibly as journalists.

My request to interview the Editors was denied by Zuraw-Friedland, who commented, “It is not in our policy to meet with individual writers.”