New Student Affairs policy is inappropriate
Our Opinion
Issue date: 11/20/08 Section: Commentary
|
The policy needs to be rescinded for a number of reasons. First and foremost, it is unfair to journalists. Journalists need to be able to contact a multitude of sources in order to report on information that is vital to the public's ability to make good decisions. This policy, if nothing else, slows that flow of information and ultimately hurts citizens. The policy is also a near violation of Connecticut's Freedom of Information Act, especially considering that UConn is a public university and therefore is required by law to disclose a great deal of information.
The policy also needs to be changed because it does not fit well with the image of the rest of the UConn community. In a Hartford Courant op-ed earlier this month, President Hogan wrote about the importance of a free and robust press in a functioning democracy. Now he is president of a school with a policy aimed at restricting the free flow of information to that very same press. This contradiction does not help the university as it tries to send a clear message about its values to the people of Connecticut.
The policy is also poorly designed because it relies far too much on university spokeswoman Karen Grava. To her falls the job of sorting through all media requests and attempting to put reporters in touch with sources in a timely manner. Considering the size of the UConn community, this would be a daunting task for 10 people, let alone for one. This system leads to a great deal of inefficiency and while Grava has aimed to be helpful, adding another person to the reporting process tends to only slow things down.
What remains to be seen is why UConn would even consider enacting such an ill-conceived policy. Quinnipiac University, which employed a similar policy against the media last year, was recently chastised by a whole host of prominent national media outlets. Indeed, The New York Times even went so far as to publish an editorial on Quinnipiac's actions, calling the policy a "gag order" and bringing unfavorable national attention to the school. UConn already receives more than its fair share of bad press for Spring Weekend; do we really need to become notorious for censorship as well?
Student Affairs' policy has no redeeming qualities and ought to be reversed as soon as possible.
Spring Break

Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 8
Horrified
posted 11/20/08 @ 11:45 AM EST
Can UConn say FIRST AMENDMENT?
Bystandard
posted 11/20/08 @ 12:07 PM EST
You should check your facts before you publish a story - It's the DIVISION of Student Affairs.
R
posted 11/20/08 @ 12:33 PM EST
The purpose of the Daily Campus is, among other things, to provide accurate and relevant news to the University of Connecticut student body. Seeing as the Daily Campus has failed at this several times this semester, the Division of Student Affairs is simply trying to help you do your job. (Continued…)
S
posted 11/20/08 @ 1:29 PM EST
To "R"
Perhaps the greater problem with this policy is the control of information. UConn is a public institution, and as such its administrators and staff should be able to speak publicly to the media. (Continued…)
David
posted 11/20/08 @ 3:57 PM EST
I agree with "R" -- this is nothing like Quinnipiac. And, having a media office through which all inquiries are channeled is STANDARD at any large organization. (Continued…)
UConn journalism alum
posted 11/20/08 @ 5:51 PM EST
David, having had to more on the "sudden death" assignment, I can tell you it is vitally important to students who aim to become professional journalists. (Continued…)
Jennifer
posted 11/20/08 @ 6:44 PM EST
Dear UConn journalism alum,
I do not understand your logic. If we are training students to become "professional journalists" instead of "student journalists," then why in the world would we give them assignments that only pertain to being "student journalists"? (You say that professional journalists take time to set up appropriate interviews. (Continued…)
Fang Lizhi
posted 11/20/08 @ 11:18 PM EST
UConn's policy is not nearly as bad as it seems to some, but it's still bad. It only covers administrators in the division of student affairs, so journalists should still have unfettered access to academics. (Continued…)
Post a Comment