1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Grambling student newspaper editor fired for covering football protest

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by SnarkShark, Oct 21, 2013.

  1. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    This happening at any university, let along a public one, is absolutely inexcusable.

  2. hondo

    hondo Well-Known Member

    Mind-boggling is that some dumb-ass administrator at Grambling believed that somehow, this wouldn't make things worse.
  3. Gator

    Gator Well-Known Member

    The one thing that stood out to me, and certainly is worthy of a suspension, is you can't cover the rally as the opinion editor AND be there as a concerned student. You're either one or the other.
  4. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Like I said over on the Grambling football suspension thread, this school just doesn't get it. They still think it's 1975 or something.
  5. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    Given the ham-handed way the school is run I don't see how anyone could be surprised by this.
  6. Pencil Dick

    Pencil Dick Member

    Can someone remind me which conference Grambling plays in?
  7. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    Southwestern Athletic Conference - SWAC
  8. lesboulez

    lesboulez Member

    if they thought it was 1975, they never would of gotten rid of Doug Williams
  9. Blue font indicates sarcasm there, chief.

    And I find it amusing you blast Grambling for this -- like another poster said, you CAN'T be involved in the protest as a "student first" and then try to cover it without bias while working for the student paper -- but you rail other posters mercilessly for how they handle what they feel are dumb emails and call-ins.

    Ahh. To be young and naive. Those were the days.
  10. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    My text is in red, to indicate the red herring you used in this post. My comments on another thread have absolutely no bearing on this topic.

    The editor that got fired didn't get involved with the protest. That was the one that got suspended.

    So, you're defending the school for firing a student editor for quoting anonymous players? Seems like this would be a reasonable instance in which anonymity could be used, to protect the players from retribution from the school, which apparently has no problem firing student editors for tweeting news they don't like.
  11. I'm not defending the school for firing a student editor for quoting anonymous players. However, we don't know -- at least I don't personally know -- if the school paper had a policy against anonymous sources.

    At the paper where I work, we have no anonymous sources. Ever. In any situation.

    So if -- big IF -- Grambling had that policy, the online editor violated it multiple times.

    There's another thing at play: Did the online editor read/edit/post Monroe's "student first" story? If so, he should have known Monroe had a clear conflict of interest.

    And not that it makes it right, but student newspapers are far different from a paid weekly or paid daily paper. I'm sure many -- OK, some -- of us on here have memories from our student paper days in which a higher-up was displeased with something we wrote/printed and encouraged us it would be in our best interests (or the college's best interests) not to make the college look bad. Especially if the college is the one footing the bill.

    Don't care if it is on here, Topix, a BLOG!!!! or egads, the paper's print edition or website, don't expect to be employed much longer for biting the hand that feeds you.

    In this instance, the online editor could have definitely been biting the hand that fed him. He might have done what he believed was the right thing. And maybe it brought the Grambling issues more to light (especially when national media picked up on it).

    Doesn't mean he wasn't going to have to pay for it though.

    So "absolutely inexcusable" isn't surprising or shocking. Probably more par for the course.
  12. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

    The student newspaper I worked for was independent from the school, so it didn't matter if the administration was bothered with what we were publishing (and it was bothered frequently).

    I don't care if this is a student paper, funded by the school or not, Grambling's actions are inexcusable.

    The student paper should be challenging the administration. That is its job.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page