Over the course of the past week, The Chronicle has come under fire for a number of decisions we've made. I stand by our content and our reporters. That is, every news coverage and editorial pages decision was made with the best intentions in doing what we thought was fair, right and balanced at the time. I do not, however, want to imply that I believe we've done everything right, but I would like to explain why some decisions are made at our independent student-run newspaper and where I hope the discussion can go from here.
Philip Kurian's Oct. 18 column, "The Jews," was written in the context of a larger conversation about the Palestine Solidarity Movement's conference and the ways in which the community responded to the conference. The opinions expressed by our columnists are not necessarily shared by our staff or editorial board. Kurian's argument was a personal opinion; it was fully within his right of free speech to write the column, and it was fully within The Chronicle's right to run it.
As many of our readers have pointed out, there is a difference between having the right to print something and being right in printing something. I believe we were right in printing the column. The value in printing it was not the assertion of First Amendment rights; it was our decision to present on our pages a more difficult discussion that resulted from the PSM conference and that is currently happening on our campus. To not print the column because the opinion presented is offensive would be to ignore a debate that is present around us. To print the column was to allow all sides to respond in a truly open forum.
If Kurian's column was placed before me again, I would still make the decision to run it, although I would likely edit some of its language with the author or place an alternate headline on it. The column has likely contributed to an uncomfortable atmosphere for Jewish students on campus. But even if The Chronicle had rejected the column, the ideas Kurian expressed would still exist.
Tracy Reinker, our editorial page editor, is working to compile the feedback we have received. In accordance with our original rationale for running the column, we want to print as much feedback as possible. Many of the letters we have received exceed our standard 325-word limit, and we have worked to run as much feedback in our pages as we can, while also notifying those who wrote in with lengthy responses that we cannot print such long letters and encouraging them to re-submit shorter versions. We will print a representative selection of these letters today and tomorrow, and we will continue to foster the dialogue that has begun among our readers and the community. Similarly, we will continue to cover in our news pages the criticisms members of the community have raised about The Chronicle and the ensuing dialogue.
I hope that as we move forward, the community continues to send in thoughtful feedback as it has in the past couple of days. Allowing this honest dialogue-about the column and the ideas behind it, as well as about The Chronicle itself and what we are and aren't doing for our readers-will allow us to strengthen our community.
I hope The Chronicle can move forward in connecting better with our readers from all sectors of the Duke community. We recognize that our readers? concerns have merit, and we are currently reviewing our processes to ensure that we are providing the most accurate, fair and balanced coverage possible, and that the opinions advanced on the editorial pages meet similar standards. Even as we are internally addressing some of the criticisms that have arisen regarding our reporting, editing and decision-making processes, I hope that we-The Chronicle and our readers-can work together to foster better communication, both about the mission and role of the newspaper and the conversations that take place on our pages.
The Chronicle is the touchstone for much of the Duke community: students, faculty and staff pick it up on their way to class or work, and many parents and alumni read our online version to stay in touch even when they're not on campus. It is incumbent upon The Chronicle, then, to recognize the fact that we have the opportunity to build community in a way that no administrator or social group can.
The Chronicle helps establish a common vocabulary. The community we build is a community of ideas. This is a responsibility our staff takes very seriously, and we are continually working together to improve the way we carry it out. As we continue our commitment to free and vigorous debate, I encourage our readers to continue to offer their feedback, whatever their opinions of our coverage or decision-making might be.
Karen Hauptman is the editor of The Chronicle.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.