DTH edit page shake up

To address all your questions:

Coincidence? No. But what happened in the last couple of days was simply the culmination of a very long semester for me -- and not just professionally. Personal and academic concerns played a major role in this; differences I have with Ryan were an instigating factor, yes, but certainly not the only factor.

It's definitely not fallout from the Bandes debacle. I think everyone involved has moved on from that.

And now that I'm a private citizen -- sort of, anyway -- I think I'll be able to give my opinions even more candidly here on OP.

Now for the part that will give you all a heart attack:

Chris Cameron, a registered Republican, is the new opinion editor.

More of the same, eh? Just you wait ... ;-)

And having a registered Republican as the opinion editor of the DTH is worrisome because ... why?

(I ask this, incidentally, as a registered Democrat.)

Eric M 11/4/05
"And having a registered Republican as the opinion editor of the DTH is worrisome because … why?"

Think about it, Eric ! What would that do for diversity?

Eric,

For me, it's not an issue at all. I hired Chris as my associate editor, and beyond that he's a good friend of mine -- we'll be going out tonight, as a matter of fact.

But given the suspicion and in some cases outright hostility around these parts when it comes to the GOP ...

We've even had GOP student body presidents at Carolina (Kevin Martin, who is now chair of the FCC) and the earth kept on spinning.

Oh, Kevin Martin! He was extraordinarily kind to us when nominated for head of the FCC. Not a fan of his politics, but a really nice guy.

Republican or not, I'll serve our university, town, county, state, and country to the best of my ablities.

Jason, it sounds to me like you are talking about a sex offender. "There's nothing inherently wrong with with having a sex offender in the neighborhood; people just need to be aware of it."

Why, exactly, do people need to be made specifically aware of the political affiliation of the editor of the DTH editorial page? What necessary information will that supply them that the editor's work and words will not? The answer, I think, is "none." It will simply be a signal to them that however well the editor might do in the job, and however persuasively he might write, he is a person not to be trusted. If the DTH is a marketplace of ideas, it will play the role of the Surgeon General's Warning on the side of a pack of cigarettes.

Is it, incidentally, the tradition of the DTH to state the political affiliation of its editorial page editors when they have been Democrats?

Somehow I doubt it.

I think you misread my statement, or I didn't make it as clear as I intended.

It's not the political affiliation that's important for people to know. It's the fact that the editorial board does not represent the average student. I don't think it did under previous editorial editors, either, so the affiliation of the editor itself has little significance.

For all the talk of diversity at UNC, I'd hope we wouldn't demand that our editorial staff be the "average student." Does that mean they should be whatever the most popular major is? Should they be involved in any extracurriculars at all? Am I supposed to hire staff (myself included) that only conform to the accepted norm at UNC? If that were the case, we'd just be towing the "party line" of whatever the aggregated student body wanted, which incidentally may not please a majority of students who hold diverse viewpoints.

Neither I nor the wonderful staff that I've inherited from Coletta are yes (wo)men. They and I carefully consider issues with the best information we have in front of us, with the student interests in mind if it's relevant to the issue at hand. Sometimes we confirm the conventional wisdom and sometimes we do not. It's a case-by-case basis without a political, social, or economic paradigm in mind.

Jason, why would people need to be told (if it is true) that the editorial board does not represent the average student?

Why can't students just read the paper and make their own decision about that question, if in fact it's a question that's even important to them?

Jason,

Perhaps your belief that the DTH edit page historically has not represented "the students" accounts for your campaign's relative lack of traction on campus?

Just a thought.

Ruby, I understand that Jason's sentiment is neither isolated nor new -- you made that perfectly clear to me at the DTH candidates forum when you talked about your work with SEAC as an undergraduate.

And frankly, I think the idea was wrong then and now. I'm not sure whether the DTH represents the average student, but -- contrary to what you seem to be suggesting -- neither do the on-campus folks who are on the far left of the political spectrum. There are plenty of lefties at UNC, but there are also hardcore conservatives and people everywhere in between; and the DTH makes a much more concerted effort at representing all of them than people who would rather divide UNC along ideological lines.

I hate to sound so cranky about this, but that sort of groupthink to which I think you're subscribing is my biggest gripe with local politics. And it's emblematic of the rank elitism that represents the worst of the Democratic Party (and the main reason I'm registered as an independent).

Of course, I think you'll be _shocked_ to discover that this sentiment is not isolated, nor is it a new phenomenon!

Actually, Jason Baker does not represent the average student at UNC either. Should we all be made aware of that too?

Although the average student at UNC is at least moderately progressive, they aren't uber-liberal. And to be honest, the average student doesn't really have much of an opinion on the things that the DTH usually comments on. Yes, the DTH has taken stances on some issues that are mistaken or grossly out of touch -- but that's usually due to shoddy research or mistaken information more than backpage partisan hackery. More often than not, they're somewhere in the range of opinions held by average UNC students...

Also, the person who brought up the party affiliation at all was the new backpage editor on his weblog. He thought it was something folks should know or he wouldn't have shared it, but his willingness to share that indicates that he's not trying to sneak in partisanship under the radar.

Okay, I'm going to step in and say that I think the Tarheel does a good job of being thorough and objective, more so than a lot of other press.

As I've said before, they did by far the best job of keeping track of the fact that there would be a Ryan on the ballot this fall. The efforts to get students involved in local politics is laudable.

I read the profiles of all the candidates, and I thought they were fair and flattering to almost everybody, which is the best a candidate can ask for.

I'm sorry Chris left, since I think he did a good job last year, and has provided an interesting balance of perspectives by columnists this year, Bandes debacle or no.

All newspapers have tumultuous times. Does anybody remember Jason Blair...Judith Miller ?

I'm looking forward to the new editor Chris's work. I'd love to see a principled conservative make a substantive arguement. It's better for public dialogue when both sides can articulate their positions intelligently.

"I'd love to see a principled conservative make a substantive arguement. "

While the backpage certainly bears the mark of whoever is the editor, it will still operate in much the same way so I don't anticipate it being a "conservative" opinion page. The editorial board will still vote. The columnists will still write. McFee will still draw "University Circus" (which has quickly become a campus favorite.) Other than an occasional column representing his own views, a vote on the edit board and perhaps in letter selection, there's not a whole lot of room in the current setup for an organized mind control from the Republican party at the Daily Tar Heel. Probably the biggest forum for that, if he chooses to use it for any sort of conservative agenda, will be his blog. Maybe that's why I'm less fearful than Jason of the integrity of the backpage or it being some sort of conservative megaphone.

I can safely say that Chris Cameron, who is also a rather good friend of mine, has no "agenda" other than writing what he believes to be right. If that leans conservatively, so be it, but he's also only one vote on a now five-member editorial board.

Gosh. I'm sorry I ever made that original joke.

that wasn't in response to me, right?

I wasn't saying he had an agenda. I was saying that even if he did, he couldn't do a whole lot with it without attracting a lot of attention.

I'm also privileged to be a good friend of Chris Cameron, and I would echo Coletta's sentiments about him. Cameron is one of the most judicious people I know. He's more than cut out to manage the opinion section.

Jason's comments seem a bit much, but Ginny's seem too conservative. While the back page is unlikely to be a "conservative megaphone" - or any other megaphone, for that matter - its choice of material, the policies it adheres to, and the personnel that run it give it more of a "mark," than Ginny says. Having worked for both Elliot Dube, last year's opinion editor, and then Coletta, I can tell you that both management style and page content is certainly different. Maybe not to the point where Ginny's "average student," takes notice, but definitely to the point where someone who keeps up with the DTH does.

Sure, but hypothetical Republican operative Chris Cameron -- if that is his real name -- isn't going to do a whole lot to shake up the DTH's backpage in the middle of the semester. The edit board, cartoonists and columnists are already chosen. That's the bulk of the backpage. Columnist selection, etc. may open a can of worms for next semester though.

I definitely understand what you're saying about seeing a different character of the backpage based on the editor, but I still stand by my relatively conservative position for Chris Cameron trying to keep it running smoothly business-as-usual until next semester.