2008 Woodie Awards
Letter to the editor 1
Issue date: 4/4/08 Section: Opinion
Editors note: The following letter is in response to "Political woes at Western," which appeared in he April 2 issue of the WC.
If gossip is bringing the current BOT race down to the level of Washington politics, as Wednesday's unsigned editorial suggests, then the unfounded rumors and speculation that has been published in the Courier lately has brought this publication down to the level of a tabloid. I don't believe that the candidates in the Board of Trustee race are responsible for the degradation of this race, but rather it is the result of the Courier staff publishing speculative stories that tend to portray both candidates in a negative light. If Mr. Antonides and Ms. Kallman are guilty of anything, it is an increased fervor for campaigning. I have gone to Western for four years now, and this is the most exciting race I have seen for any position.
Please don't get me wrong, I agree that the media should be the "watchdog" of government; nevertheless, I'm not entirely convinced that this role would encompass the printing of unsubstantiated rumors. I highly doubt that certain administrators are leaning on student-athletes to vote a certain way or face decreased play time. However, if this rumor is indeed "most likely" true (as it was phrased in the article) then perhaps one of the investigative journalists on the Courier staff should follow up on this lead and oust the corrupt administrator. I would argue that a state-employed administrator using his or her authority in order to force students to vote a certain way is more alarming, and certainly more newsworthy, than candidates campaigning early.
Furthermore, the message of the political cartoon that accompanied the unsigned editorial is interesting in that it negatively portrays the increased effort put into this campaign by both candidates The first time that I saw a yard sign urging me to vote for a certain candidate, I was happy. Then when I began to see the opposing candidate placing signs as a rebuttal, I was extremely happy. This happiness was due to the realization that this would be an exciting student election, the likes of which I had yet to see at Western. I don't feel that anybody should be saying that the candidates went "overboard," but rather that these two candidates are setting a precedent for future campaigns. Obviously, I do not condone breaking campaign, or any other, rules in order to gain an unfair edge over your opponent. However, if the passion exerted in this campaign can be reproduced in the following years, then I believe this campaign season will be viewed as an asset to the student election process at WIU, rather than a detriment, as the Courier claims.
If gossip is bringing the current BOT race down to the level of Washington politics, as Wednesday's unsigned editorial suggests, then the unfounded rumors and speculation that has been published in the Courier lately has brought this publication down to the level of a tabloid. I don't believe that the candidates in the Board of Trustee race are responsible for the degradation of this race, but rather it is the result of the Courier staff publishing speculative stories that tend to portray both candidates in a negative light. If Mr. Antonides and Ms. Kallman are guilty of anything, it is an increased fervor for campaigning. I have gone to Western for four years now, and this is the most exciting race I have seen for any position.
Please don't get me wrong, I agree that the media should be the "watchdog" of government; nevertheless, I'm not entirely convinced that this role would encompass the printing of unsubstantiated rumors. I highly doubt that certain administrators are leaning on student-athletes to vote a certain way or face decreased play time. However, if this rumor is indeed "most likely" true (as it was phrased in the article) then perhaps one of the investigative journalists on the Courier staff should follow up on this lead and oust the corrupt administrator. I would argue that a state-employed administrator using his or her authority in order to force students to vote a certain way is more alarming, and certainly more newsworthy, than candidates campaigning early.
Furthermore, the message of the political cartoon that accompanied the unsigned editorial is interesting in that it negatively portrays the increased effort put into this campaign by both candidates The first time that I saw a yard sign urging me to vote for a certain candidate, I was happy. Then when I began to see the opposing candidate placing signs as a rebuttal, I was extremely happy. This happiness was due to the realization that this would be an exciting student election, the likes of which I had yet to see at Western. I don't feel that anybody should be saying that the candidates went "overboard," but rather that these two candidates are setting a precedent for future campaigns. Obviously, I do not condone breaking campaign, or any other, rules in order to gain an unfair edge over your opponent. However, if the passion exerted in this campaign can be reproduced in the following years, then I believe this campaign season will be viewed as an asset to the student election process at WIU, rather than a detriment, as the Courier claims.
Be the first to comment on this story