“It is a newspaper’s duty to print the news and raise hell.”
This quote, from the founding edition of the Chicago Times, is the general guideline for all newspapers that wish to be anything more than a advertising circular. Newspapers ought to be provocative and challenge those in power but always doing their best to give both sides a fair shake.
Though I am not a mass communication student – my areas are history and English – I have a fondness for the journalistic endevour. Most of the folks I’ve met in my time at this newspaper have a thirst for truth and have done their best to find it out. Having served under five editors-in-chief, and I have never been pressured or told not to write about a certain topic because of its controversy. Because of this process, as well as studying the masters of this craft, I believe I have become a better, bolder writer.
For this reason, I was revolted when I read that The Daily Illini, the student newspaper from the University of Illinois, fired their editor-in-chief, Acton Gorton, because of, and the opinions editor’s reprinting some of the controversial Mohammed cartoons.
I wrote a column on February 13 of a similar case in Wales. There, the editor of Gair Rhydd, Tom Wellingham, was suspended from the university and shredded copies of the paper. Here, in America at the very least the paper allowed Gorton some form of due process in the form of a suspension with pay before his termination.
Still, his termination, as well as the resignation of opinions editor Chuck Prochaska – though he had the option to keep his position – amounts in my mind to a chilling effect on a newspaper’s attempt to inform the community. Apparently the chief objection, at least from the brass that this decision to reprint the cartoons ticked off, was that Gorton and Prochaska went behind everyone’s back to do this. Now I’m not sure how The Daily Illini is structured, so my ignorance here may well show here. At The Daily Reveille the only two individuals who have a say in what shows up on the opinion page is myself and my boss, Walter Gabriel. While I have a deep respect for Dennis Mitchell and Jennifer Mayeux, our two managing editors, they have no say over my section’s content.
Somehow it all seems too neat, too contrived. Gorton’s firing as well as the Hosty v. Carter court decision, ought to make everyone at a student publication pause. The first may well serve to show students that some issues, some controversies are not to be touched – the red light and the strong arm that says, “here be the dragons.” Hosty, which applies only to a small swath of the country as yet, would allow the censorship of college publications in a manner similar to high school newspapers.
In short, we have the beginnings of a new era of fear, censorship and self-serving double talk. Journalists of all people should not be afraid of telling the truth, of offending people. Instead we are on our way to becoming a worthless aggregate of cowards, hacks and prostitutes toward whomever is in power.
When men who have the courage to actually print things the community cares about, even if folks violently disagree about them, are axed, what’s the point of journalism? We might as well print press releases.
What can we do to avoid this fate? For one, we can refuse to continence silence. If you don’t find what you’re looking for in your local paper, look to some other medium. I know I rely more on the British Guardian and independent papers than any other U.S. media for their more thorough coverage of international news. We can also look at ourselves. It is quite one thing to dislike an article, to write letters against it and even to no longer read its author. It is quite another thing to say that something should not see the light of day because it is offensive. Because once we exempt one group from criticism, we move rapidly toward exempting everyone.
And at that point your newspaper will be a coupon sheet with pictures of puppies. And we shall all be the poorer for it.
 
Ryan is a history senior. Contact him
at [email protected]