The first time I was really faced with the realization of the importance of my contributions to The News-Letter was probably in a lecture hall on Oct. 11, 2012, early in the fall of my freshman year. I still remember so vividly sitting in “The Constitution and the Criminal Justice System” and witnessing firsthand the effects of my work on the paper.
As I sat down and browsed Facebook until class started, two upperclassmen guys walked into the Hodson lecture hall and sat down behind me.
“Did you see this article on sex offenders?” one asked the other. “Yeah. I can’t believe they printed that,” the other replied.
The two engaged in a discussion intensely critical of The News-Letter’s decision to publish the article and of my reporting. I sat there smiling because I knew what this meant. I wasn’t upset or defensive; on the contrary, I was honored and formed a deep, deep respect for these two upperclassmen.
Of important note is that this was not just another article. This was my baby.
When I was racking my brain for ideas, I thought about all of the potential topics significant to the student body and decided to research and report on how many registered sex offenders live around our campus.
When I finally crunched the statistics, I was taken aback. I discovered that 70 registered sex offenders lived within a one-mile radius of Homewood Campus, including four labeled “offenders,” 40 “child sex offenders” and 26 “sexually violent offenders.”
Recognizing this information as of great import to the student body, I reported these statistics and profiled the offenses of a few of the offenders on the National Sex Offender Registry who lived closest to campus.
I sat and smiled as these two upperclassmen ripped it to shreds, arguing vehemently that the decision to profile individual offenders violated their privacy, and the comparison of statistics surrounding our campus to those of Towson and Loyola made Hopkins look bad.
I couldn’t stop from smiling.
Why? Because my article had generated a dialogue, and the dialogue wasn’t just superficial. Hearing that criticism meant that students had read the article, thought carefully about what it included and formed their own informed opinions on the matter. This kind of exchange is so, so crucial for our campus.
A student newspaper, in my view, really serves four essential functions. First, it informs readers with accurate information, highlighting information important to — and for — them. Second, it serves as a historical chronicle, telling the story of what was happening at Hopkins when the edition was published. Third, it provides a free forum for student opinion and for engagement in a productive exchange of opinions and perspectives. And finally, it serves to entertain readers, be it with lighthearted features or cartoons. These functions are immensely valuable for our community.
And yet in order for The News-Letter to achieve these crucial goals on campus, readers must actively engage with the paper. This means much more than just absorbing its content; readers must also critically examine the paper’s coverage.
On The News-Letter, I’ve always worked incredibly hard to provide accurate and relevant coverage that holds those in positions of power accountable and enlightens readers on matters they wouldn’t otherwise know about. But nobody is perfect, and I certainly am not. This is why I have always placed immense value upon the role of the Hopkins community in speaking out and engaging with the paper when members disagree with my decisions as editor. After all, this is about more than just the present; this is about our legacy. Someone 50 years from now should be able to go into the University archives, pick up a copy of the paper and see what was happening in April of 2015, see what mattered to the Classes of 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018.
Having a fully independent paper that looks out for Hopkins students is absolutely important, even more so in such a small community with little-to-no other oversight and plenty of institutional propaganda. Students simply must embrace the value of The News-Letter as an institution. And yet students’ role in holding the paper accountable cannot be dismissed either.
The News-Letter’s content isn’t always popular; few articles confronting readers with sometimes ugly truths about themselves and their communities would be. Articles are not meant to make Hopkins look good or to make people happy. They are meant to enlighten and to spur productive conversations that, ultimately, improve our community. Sometimes it takes confronting our shortcomings to correct them.
Active (albeit respectful) dialogue about News-Letter content improves our community and simultaneously holds the paper accountable to ensure it truly does serve the needs of our community.
My article on sex offenders generated a discussion, both about an article’s content and The News-Letter’s decision to publish it. Both of these conversations are absolutely crucial to a well-functioning Hopkins community and simply must continue far after I matriculate from the illustrious staff of The News-Letter.
