It’s been quite a political week at the University. The University Board of Elections has had several campaigns on its hands, from Second Year Council presidential elections to voting on new Honor representatives and constitutional amendments. The Cavalier Daily has had no qualms covering these stories and analyzing their horses in the races. But how far should a newspaper, composed of more than just one opinionated individual, go in revealing its stances?
It’s a paradoxical question. On one hand, a newspaper like this one stands as an outlet for democratic discourse. It serves as a mouthpiece for those who wish to disclose and engage with different perspectives and viewpoints. The Cavalier Daily’s Opinion section is a perfect example: every week, readers will encounter arguments for and against various issues and topics. What other places here, besides myriad social media outlets, allow for students to do so in such a formalized way?
Furthermore, issues like Student Council elections, Honor amendments and other governmental stories are most essential for The Cavalier Daily to cover. These sorts of subjects concern a majority of the student populous — those who are willing to participate in student government, that is. Regardless, such coverage is worth undertaking. Especially at a University like ours, which prides itself so much on the concept of “self-government,” the dispersal and promulgation of political perspectives remains vital to the sustenance of a critical, thoughtful community. By few other means can one stimulate discourse and thought at a place like a university.
Yet there are some counterpoints to consider. Obviously, a journal like The Cavalier Daily is not merely made of one person. It contains many people with many different opinions. The levels and degrees to which they can reveal and form them vary, but the diversity of their experiences remains constant. The newspaper can’t move forward with one static viewpoint: it must, at the very least, try to accommodate those of its contributors, as well. The subsequent mélange of voices is what makes each publication, each issue of our University’s newspaper a different product, different than the last.
Thus, an inherent danger comes with with spreading one’s opinion, especially concerning the objectivity of reporting. One can’t be too careful when it comes to sticking to the issue at hand. If one’s own convictions prove too strong, then the ability to discursively exhibit the topic is immediately quashed. Objective journalism goes out the window, and the publication — along with all of its contributors — gains the dreaded “bias” label that is so hard to shake afterwards.
The question we now come to is this: what about University student politics deserves objectivity, and what warrants the expression of one’s opinion? Well, the articles above serve as good examples. On one hand, basic reporting of candidates and their stances seems relatively harmless, if not vital to the entire process. If students can inform themselves of such political positions and think for themselves, then such stories can serve a productive purpose overall.
However, treading the line between the promotion of facts and opinions is a dangerous task. The exposure The Cavalier Daily can provide for candidates and political perspectives can be invaluable. But it must be carried out carefully and prudently. One cannot sacrifice rational reporting for the promulgation of an ideology, unless alternatives are thusly offered. In other words, if you’re going to argue for or against a candidate or issue, it must be certain the truth has already been established.
In short, papers lik The Cavalier Daily — as institutions and singular publications — should do their utmost not to take sides in elections and political events. There’s a delicate balance to be maintained. Objectivity, though difficult to attain, should be the chief priority. They should be sure to chiefly report what will allow the average student to make an informed decision. Otherwise, the democratic powers they possess will become muddled with the miasma of nepotistic bias.
Sasan Mousavi is the Public Editor for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at publiceditor@cavalierdaily.com or on Twitter at @CDPublicEditor.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 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 | 5 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | April 25, 2024Instead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
