Which is more important, fee hikes or girls in panties?
Girls in panties, obviously. Just ask The DVC Inquirer.
After grabbing the latest issue of the school newspaper on my way to class Thursday morning, my dorky, journalistic excitement was quelled as soon as I read the cover story. In it, writer Ariel Messman-Rucker reports on a fraudulent Facebook profile displaying provocative photos of ASDVC President Lindsay St. Hill. While the profile was not created by St. Hill, the pictures and videos on the profile were legitimate, some of which show St. Hill topless or scantily clad in lingerie.
You learn from the article that St. Hill took these photos and videos to beef up her modeling profile and is understandably weary to have them all but advertised on the front page of the DVC “news” paper.
But wait! Don’t put that paper down! Because once you’re finished reading the cover gossip column, you can look below the fold to read about a shooting that took place at DVC last week, not to mention the announcement that registration fees are likely to hike to $40 a unit next semester.
Seriously, Inquirer? My advance apologies to my fellow classmates who count themselves as staff of this paper, but this is appalling.
After reading the St. Hill story, I intuitively turned to the opinion page, expecting an editorial justifying this publishing decision. And what do you know! There it was.
In this editorial, the reader is told that the DVC Inquirer, after weighing its moral options, viewed this “legitimate news story” as pertinent enough to bypass St. Hill’s right to privacy.
“We chose to go ahead with the story because St. Hill is the public “face” of DVC students…The fact that St. Hill made a conscious choice to pose for sexually suggestive photos and videos raises questions about her judgment,” said the DVC Inquirer editorial.
I could make a decent argument as to why this story should not have been published at all, but that isn’t even what upsets me. What upsets me is that The Inquirer deemed this story more important than any other that was published this issue. What is the justification for that? Just as the staff of The Inquirer questioned the judgment of St. Hill, the student body should question the judgment of a newspaper that would rather showcase the personal transgressions of one young woman than alert students to fee hikes that could affect the entire institution.
In all fairness, the story did make an interesting read. I was intrigued enough to finish the entire story (which may have been the longest of the semester, by the way). Which only reinforces my fear that The Inquirer chose this story as front-page fodder specifically for its sensationalism. It’s an effective strategy, one implemented by most weekly tabloids. It also reeks of yellow journalism with its sensational approach.
Bravo, Inquirer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm glad you brought this up! You should definitely write a letter to the editor to Ariel.
ReplyDeleteNeither me nor Brian are editors so we really don't get to see what's going to be on the issue until the very last minute :/
All the staff members are supposed to come up with story ideas but we don't get to write what we want to, so most of the time, we have no idea which stories are going to be published.
Actually I'm not trying to throw anybody under the bus but, I did't even know Ariel was writing a story about Lindsay until few days before the publication day! I've known Lindsay for over a year now so it was a little awkward for me.
I do see your point that gunfire and fee hikes are way more important than ASDVC president's personal drama.
Oh my! I agree with you Colleen! Your first two paragraphs themselves took me by surprise that they actually put this story on the cover page! That is horrible when I don't even foresee the point of having this printed on the Inquirer at all. If it IS worth a read (just as they claimed it to be), it is definitely not as important to the student body to know than fee hikes and the much-talked-about gunshots that have been shaking the student population.
ReplyDeleteNice work Colleen! I really enjoyed reading your piece. I think this critique should go to the Inquirer. Give the editor some sort of a wake-up call.
I'm not even sure how to begin this post.
ReplyDeleteThis article thankfully doesn't show any of the provocative pictures, nor do the headline and subheadline mention the details of the pictures. And yes, it is an interesting article that calls St. Hill's integrity into question.
And yet.
What percentage of the student populace is affected by the fee hikes? And it makes sense for the student population to be aware that there was a shooting on campus.
Lindsay St. Hill may well be "the "public" face of DVC students" as mentioned in the editorial, but this scandal directly affects a limited number of students, in comparison to the fee hikes. I very definitely agree with you, Colleen, this was chosen for sensationalism over newsworthiness.
Congrats. I think that sums up anything I could say. Now I'm not one to make judgments on other women's decisions given that I am a Model, and a Dancer at that and we live in a world where "sex appeal" gets you somewhere.
ReplyDeleteBut the fact that you pointed out the REAL issue at hand about fee hikes is definitely a cause for applause! Knowing that fees are going up to $40 a unit is much more important to me than what our President did some odd years ago!
So once again, I say congrats!