This issue of the Voice looks a little different than past editions. We have a number of investigative pieces, ranging from an examination of the #takebackourshowers campaign to the Mike Kmec indictment and recent break-ins at off-campus housing locations. We aim to explore all sides of a story, interview relevant figures, and ask probing questions to give the campus community news of the greatest relevance. But stories that criticize the College administration–or at least reveal controversial policy–have the potential to devolve into gossip. While news can never be neutral, and every writer holds biases, we strive to balance each article by reflecting on the policy that spurred discussion rather than the voices of individual members on campus.
Students living in Ridge 5, for instance, provided the Voice with inside details on the nature of last week’s break-in. While they gave us important information not released to the wider campus community by Campus Safety, their testimony was not the focal point of the article. Instead, their perspective allowed us to more fully explore the relationship between the College and the New London police, as well as understand how the College plans to address lingering security concerns. News Editor Alex Klavens also relies on court documents to frame the Mike Kmec article—and thereby avoid the potential for the piece to appear anything other than factual.
We do pride ourselves on finding a “scoop” because digging deep into campus issues is a necessary component of relevant, worthwhile journalism. But the word “scoop” also holds gossipy connotations that seem particularly pronounced when we report at a small and insular school with a tight-knit community. So we want to make clear that we never seek to perpetuate or spread rumors with the Voice’s reporting. While we can’t always control how the community reacts our published pieces, we hold ourselves to the highest standards to ensure that we do not perpetuate unverified or unproductive information. To respect the privacy of our peers, we also want to emphasize that the Voice will always protect the identity of its anonymous sources.
We have been told that we sometimes are too critical of the College administration in our reportage, and other members of the campus community say we could do more to report on controversial college policy. Our goal, though, is not to attack any individual or institution–it is to make people on campus aware of policy developments. Only with awareness can we take collective action to understand our shared interests and positions. We hope that this issue sheds light on leading campus issues and moves us closer toward achieving awareness of campus activity.
-Dana
