The Panther Prints 6%

January 28, 1997

Letters to the Editor

Letter to the Editor

In last week’s edition of the Panther Prints there appeared an article entitled “Digging Up Dirt...” in which the Soc/Anth Depart- ment was portrayed in a un- just manner, singling out one professor in particular. This was completely inappropri- ate; a prime example of in- competent journalism. I am left to assume that Ms Caseley’s intention was to create a scandal through the use of unscrupulous sensa- tionalism. If the goal was to reduce the student newspa-

per to tabloid status then I must commend Caseley on a job well done.

The article in question was amisinterpretation of facts creating a picture which is completely distorted. I be- lieve it is the responsibility of a reporter to present all as- pects of any given story, to present information in the con- text in which it was intended, and to remain impartial allow- ing readers to form his/her own opinion. I am sure that had Caseley consulted with others involved in each incident an-

other viewpoint would have emerged and indeed pre- vailed over the narrow ac- counts she had given. Although misleading the public seems to be com- mon practice amongst mem- bers of the media it does not mean it is excusable. The article is nothing short of slander, in fact, the sole ob- jective was obviously to cre- ate a controversy with abso- lutely no reagard for proper journalistic procedure.

‘Sherri Doherty.

To the editor:

In response to the arti- cle "Digging up Dirt on the Soc/Anth Dept", I would like to clarify some of the facts. This sordid attempt to attack the department and crucify the professors within was mortifying. Ms. Casely does not speak for all the students at UPEI; I would even go so far to say that her followers are few in number. Ms.Casely quoted erroneous

hearsay on the issue of the 201 class. I was in that class and Ms. "MacDonald’s" response to Holbrook when he retuned her paper graded 49% was out of context and extreme. He would not fail a student on such a basis. To my knowl- edge, the lady refered to was weighed down with other pressing issues, which she brodcast both in and out of class. It is not my belief, nor

should it be her’s, that the stress of her ‘ordeal’ con- tributed to her 'breakdown'. I am a single mother with two small children, and am also a full time student. I myself have failed a course. If I took a breakdown everytime I ran into stress, I'd be in Unit 9forever.

Jennifer Blagden 3rd year Anthropology

To the editor,

To the great dismay of many an aspiring journalist, this is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that a young, ambitious ‘journalist’, in believing that she has found the ‘big scoop’, has fallen flat on her face. It’s sad, really, that such things must happen, but I suppose that it is the bad things in this world that help us recognize the good.

I have no doubt Ms. eats felt entirely justified in titling her ‘article’ “Digging up Dirt’, for it is at that level of investigation and journalistic integrity falls, that is to say, in the dirt. I simply don’t see an article worthy of print in a supposedly respectable paper -- rather, I see a malicious, misguided, biased, and libelous attempt at sensationalism.

And sensationalism, not truth or objectivity, was Ms. Casely’s desired result. Because I am neither cowardly nor malicious, I am unafraid to attach my name to my statements. Neither is my associate, Ryan Mccarville, who was present at the so-called interview she conducted. By her own admission (and this is not hearsy or rumour; I can back up my claims with more than opinions) Ms Casely informed me that her intent was to create an article worth of print on the national level, at which point she explained that she wished us to put credence to a list of simply outlandish rumours. When Ryan and I, who could not morally answer such tripe, declined, she replied “You guys are no fun. I want some good dirt.”

No mention, I am sorry to say, was made of the great number of positive items of interest we did discuss, such as the progressive elements we are currently working toward in concert with the faculty, which stand only to benefit students. Disregarded were the excellent record of the Soc/Anth Soci- ety, the new Honours program, or the large majority of happy students.

I also ask Ms. Casely to reflect on the commom coin. One will notice, with a tiny measure of observation and thought, that the coin does have two sides, both of which, while contributing to the whole of the coin, bear different designs and likenesses. Consider the coin a little more Ms Casely; it will reveal a great number of truths.

Next time, Ms Casely, make an attempt to interview all those involved in an issue. An interpretation of a chain of events is just that -- not necessarily the truth. Otherwise, only the Panther Prints and its like will be signing yrue meagre paycheck.

In conclusion, I hereby formally request an apology to be made on the part of Ms. Casely and the Panther Prints to all ' parties named and implied in the article, for its, malicious, and misguided intent.

And like I said, remember the coin has two sides. You will find, I think, that one side often evens out the other.

Micheal G. Drake President, Soc\Anth Society