Letter to the Black and White

The following is a letter by Silver Chips' editors to Walt Whitman High School's newspaper, the Black and White, and the Black and White column to which they are responding. The Black and White column, by Ombudsman Abe Clayman, is reprinted with permission, and the Silver Chips editors' letter was originally printed in the Black and White.

Ombudsman Abe Clayman's Jan. 17 column "Blazer Style" contained some valid critiques of a December Silver Chips story [see story, Vikings are going down, Blazer style, and related stories School pride at the cost of maturity and Vikings are getting disgruntled, Blazer style] that humorously attempted to start a Blair-Whitman rivalry. Clayman, however, exceeded reason when he claimed that our decision to print the column, which expressed the personal opinion of Ben Meiselman, "raises issues about a newspaper's mission."

Contrary to Clayman's sermon, Meiselman's column was by no means so "unduly irresponsible" as to warrant censorship. The column was controversial, humorous and outspoken. But it was factual, and it corresponded, for better or worse, to the feelings of many Blair students. Part of our mission is to represent the Blair community, and student reaction indicates Meiselman, to some extent, did exactly that.

Censoring the column, as Clayman urged, would have constituted poor journalistic judgment. There is more to journalism than erring always on the side of safety and conformity. Controversy is, we believe, not only acceptable but sometimes desirable. While we certainly did not hope Meiselman's column would enrage Whitman students, censorship is never justified by fear of ruffling a few feathers. Indeed, it would be irresponsible for us to adopt a policy of censoring any opinion that might possibly offend.

And given that Meiselman's opinion echoed many Blair students', printing the column was far more appropriate than censorship. Although in retrospect we wish we had improved the column's blend of humor and fact, that error does not change our obligation to let an opinion writer offer his opinion, so long as his facts are accurate and he speaks to a community concern.

Where Clayman was perhaps most mistaken was in his suggestion that Meiselman's column somehow detracted from the rest of Silver Chips. According to Clayman, Silver Chips "abdicated its responsibility to present news fairly and became a sensationalizing rather than rationalizing force in the community."

We find it interesting that Clayman claims to represent our community, especially when not a single community member has expressed any wavering in his or her respect for our overall coverage. Had Clayman seen our other content at silverchips.mbhs.edu, he would have found fair, challenging journalism whose merits no reasonable reader would deny because Ben Meiselman happened to think Blair and Whitman would make good rivals.

We also disagree that the duty of Silver Chips or any other newspaper is to be a straight-laced "rationalizing force" that fears being "provocative." We report the facts, and sometimes those facts do not favor stability. Sometimes they do. But our success stems from our willingness to raise tough issues—to honor the First Amendment by exercising its freedoms.

Note: The following column, from Whitman's Black and White, represents the opinions of Ombudsman Abe Clayman and does not necessarily represent the views of the Black and White.

In the Dec. 19 issue of Montgomery Blair's newspaper, Silver Chips, managing sports editor Ben Meiselman, in an attempt to incite a rivalry between Whitman and Blair, wrote an opinion piece attacking Whitman's wealth, prestige and overall lack of diversity. He named the rivalry between the two schools "an epic struggle of good versus evil" and gave Whitman students the title "snooty, rich vermin." While Meiselman may not have incited a true athletic rivalry, he managed to garner over one hundred responses on the Silver Chips website and general animosity from Whitman students. Whether or not Meiselman was correct in his assessment of the differences between Blair and Whitman is irrelevant because he couched that assessment in an insulting article. The article raises issues about a newspaper's mission and about when opinion pieces should be published.

In his article, Meiselman attempted to raise serious issues about race and class in the same forum in which he hurled petty insults toward Whitman and its students. Instead, Silver Chips should have either attempted to maturely discuss issues of inequality or only humorously incite a rivalry. A newspaper according to The Elements of Journalism by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, has a duty to "serve as an independent monitor of power" as well as provide "a forum for public criticism and compromise." Had Silver Chips followed these two journalistic tenets, the newspaper would have seriously discussed, investigated and come to conclusion about how to fix the inequalities associated with race and class in Montgomery County. Instead, the newspaper tried to create an "us versus them" atmosphere between diverse Blair and relatively homogenous Whitman.

In addition to raising issues about the duty of a newspaper, Meiselman's column makes clear the need for editors to take responsibility for what their newspaper publishes. When Meiselman wrote his column, as various members of Silver Chips pointed out in online comments, he expressed only his view and not necessarily the view of anyone else. Even so, when the article in question is such an unduly irresponsible piece, the newspaper has a responsibility to restrict its writes and not publish the article.

While Meiselman is free to express his opinion, the newspaper and the public can expect that he will do so in an appropriate and journalistically responsible manner. Jeremy Hoffman, online managing editor at Silver Chips, pointed out that Meiselman's column "was destructive and immature, and should not have been published." Hoffman further wrote that Meiselman's "childish name-calling has no place in a reputable journalistic institution." Since Meiselman's article lacked journalistic merit, Silver Chips should not have published the article. When the newspaper did so, it abdicated its responsibility to present news fairly and became a sensationalizing rather than an rationalizing force in the community.

A newspaper has a duty to monitor its community and to investigate and expose inequalities in that community. Additionally, a newspaper should not publish articles that are inappropriate, insulting and immature. In its provocative and insulting attempt to start an athletic rivalry between Blair and Whitman, Meiselman and Silver Chips neglected these two responsibilities.