THE GLOVES are off, and the Ombudsman is impelled (nay, forced!) to comment on the running battle. Al and Dubya? Allen and Robb? No, the conflict of import to the Ombudsman is the volley between Letter to the Editor author Nicholas Graber-Grace and Cavalier Daily cartoonist Kevin Bostic, creator of Paradigm Shift.
For those of you who haven't been reading the paper as if it were your job, here's a brief recap. Mr. Bostic's strip on Sept. 14 contained a joke about getting an alien into the University through affirmative action. One of Paradigm Shift's characters, Bueno, had been abducted by aliens, but escaped with the help of one of the alien crewmembers. As the alien is now living with them, the characters of Paradigm Shift began plotting how to enroll the alien at the University, resulting in the affirmative action joke.
On Sept. 18, a letter is published from Mr. Graber-Grace complaining that the strip "suggests that anyone who has benefitted from affirmative action is somehow less than human." Mr. Graber-Grace adds that the strip goes beyond the "intolerable and racist position" that some people are included by affirmative action who are "not deserving of" their place at the University.
In response, Mr. Bostic used three out of his last five strips to roast Mr. Graber-Grace. The three strips were gags related to Mr. Graber-Grace's letter, including a direct parody of him as "Nicholas Saving-Grace." While the Ombudsman hates to draw attention to this tempest in a teapot, the conflict between these gentlemen does help illustrate two points worth comment.
First, there is the matter of Mr. Graber-Grace's letter in protest to Mr. Bostic's affirmative action joke. The letter was powerfully worded, and its author clearly feels strongly about the comic's topic. Affirmative action programs are a topic about which there has been nothing but passionate debate, virtually since their inception.
The Ombudsman is compelled, however to remind Mr. Graber-Grace that Paradigm Shift is a comic strip. It is intended to be a joke, not a dianoetic format designed for richly textured debate. Comics provoke reaction, sometimes laughter, sometimes pathos, and sometimes anger or offense. However, Mr. Graber-Grace's letter was blistering in its tone. A little perspective here goes a long way. Mr. Graber-Grace's response was more suited to an op-ed piece on affirmative action, not an attempt to be funny.
As my friend, the comic novelist Arik Berglund, often says, "There is no humor without risk." Mr. Bostic is supposed to be provocative. Mr. Bostic is merely filling a role which collegiate cartoonists have occupied for years - edgy, risk-driven humor. While in no way trying to minimize Mr. Graber-Grace's concerns, it is probably safe to say that we could all use our sense of humor a bit more when reading the Comics page.
|
Except for Mr. Bostic, who could have used his sense of humor a bit less this week, at least when it comes to Mr. Graber-Grace. Cartoonists, especially of anarchic humor such as Mr. Bostic's, expect some public outcry, some Letters to the Editor. Such complaints are part of the territory.
On those occasions when a particularly vitriolic or adamant critic complains, it is almost too much to expect the cartoonist to leave such commentary unaddressed. Yet, enough is enough, and three times is too much. Mr. Bostic, by the virtue of a daily strip, has a bully pulpit with which to make his voice heard. With such authority comes responsibility, and at some point arises a responsibility to be restrained in one's response to critics.
When you write a Letter to the Editor, you voluntarily enter into a public debate, and risk having your opinion challenged, even mocked. The reason journalists should show restraint in responding to reader criticism is that it is generally a beneficial process when people write in with complaints, criticism, and yes, even praise. It is in no one's interest to chill the response from readers, the people for whom the newspaper exists. When a reader sees a person being mocked day after day on the Comics page for a Letter to the Editor, then that reader may later be reluctant to write to the paper for fear of being subsequently embarrassed in a forum in which they have no equal access to respond, or defend their viewpoint.
So, if two columnists, or two cartoonists, wish to have a protracted battle in the paper, that is generally acceptable, for both have equal voices. It is a different situation when one of the voices in the discussion is a non-journalist, and it is in such situations that journalists must show professional self-restraint.
The Ombudsman would point out that he would in no way seek to discourage individuals from contributing to the public discourse regarding The Cavalier Daily. Both Mr. Graber-Grace and Mr. Bostic have valuable opinions and should be respected for their willingness to engage in their respective forums. Criticism is good, reader commentary is good, it is an important part of a free press. The Ombudsman encourages all readers to engage in reasoned responses to what they read and see in The Cavalier Daily and to email the Ombudsman with their concerns.
(Brent Garland can be reached at ombud@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
IYER: Sports stadiums should sport more benefit to Virginia residents
By Arjun Iyer | 20 hours agoPast stadiums in other states show that Virginia has the potential to succeed at such a construction project, provided that proper measures are undertaken.
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 5 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | April 27, 2024The University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
