University of South Carolina Libraries
viewpoint Opinion pa By JOHN R. WEST Editor-in-Chief I was both relieved and dismayed to discover Sunday tnat Wayne Brooks and not Brian Daly had written the letter to the editor titled, "Award recipient undeserving." Daly came to The Gamecock office early Sunday morning and admitted he had not written the letter that appeared in the April 24th issue. He stated that the letter did not reflect his own opinions, and he then signed a statement saying that Brooks had written the | letter. Brooks later admitted he had written the letter, and he was fired immediately. I regret that this paper has been misused in an attempt to discredit certain individuals. In his letter Brooks attacked both the selection process for the editorship of The Gamecock and Bryan's I worthiness to receive the Algernon Sydney Sullivan Awarri fnr pvponHnnol ^^VV|/VtVllUi kJCi Vltc. Let me explain a few things about each. Before anyone applying for ( the editorship of The ^ Gamecock reaches the Board , of Publications he first must go j before a screening committee. { Phis committee, composed of journalism professors and the current Gamecock editor, \ interviews each person and t i ? it nudges mem on tne oasis of j Editor af To all concerned: I wish to thank my staff very , much for their efforts and the long and sometimes tedious nours they devoted this semester on The Gamecock. Each and everyone of them have at one time or another , been responsible for pulling the paper through when dif- * ficulties arose. To put out a newspaper twice a week is not an easy task. Compound that with full college loads, parttime jobs and a few hours a night for j sleep and you have an almost j impossible task. I think back at times when | disagreements would arise and ] how adament pnrh of vnn wprp , in voicing your opinions. I i thank you all for that because < that is why you received your ( editorial positions in the first j place. Your strong wills and j high goals were reflected in < your work. Opinions were I voiced against the paper at < times with those of malice ts ge editor is their professional experience rnu- - miu auiuiy. 1 ne screening committee then sends the results of the interviews to the Board of Publications. It is then up to the Board of Publications to screen each perspective candidate for character, judgment, leadership ability and objectivity. The Board, made up of four students and three faculty members, then makes it's decision. Its decision was four to one in favor of the present editor, with one student and one faculty member absent. Jonathan Rrvan ic o ?J MIA M Carolina Scholar, and an honor student and has been consistently on the President's Honor Roll. He has served as president of Mortar Board, and as chairman of both the Student Government Elections Commission and the Student Board of Publications and Communications, and he has been on the soccer team for( three years. Bryan received the Algernon Sydney Sullivan Award for his exceptional service to USC and for his high personal standards and tor no other reason. rhis is the highest honor a student can receive from this university, and Bryan Jeserved it. What is still undecided is vhat disciplinary action the iniversity might wish to >ursue as well as whether law jplauds s being from a few vindictive persons, while others were quite legitimate, such as Biran Glazer's on inartpniinto coverage of Greek Week. Other criticisms stemmed from our just doing what we were supposed to do ? report objectively and impartially. We did, however, make our share of mistakes. Let me thank you, Jane, for also believing that pure objectivity, although almost Impossible to reach, should always be the ultimate goal, rhe position of News Editor is by far the most difficult. It is he or she who receives requests and at times demands from almost every faction of zampus life to cover their ivents. It is inst nnt nnsaihlo fn _ ? ... - J - a.w 1/VWWIR/4V 1?V publish it all. There are probably a hundred or more jlubs, fraternities, sororities rom ZBT to the motorcycle ;lub. And when you did give 'special coverage" to one dismissed suits may be filed for defamation of character with malicious intent. Brooks has been appointed the news editor of The Gamecock by the incoming editor. Clearly this apointment should be revoked. If Brooks is allowed any position of responsibility on future Gamecock staffs, the paper will simply lack credibility with both students and faculty, no matter how carefully its stories mav hp rwioflrrhpH It should always be remembered that the purpose of this paper, like any paper, is to serve the community and its readers, and when factions with selfish intent seek and do gain control, the well being of the community and individuals in that community are at their mercy. A word needs to be said now in defense of the rest of the il-!- ' sic!11 mis semesier. we have tried to present the news in a fair and objective fashion. In the case of controversial news stories, nothing was printed that was not confirmed by three independent sources. When we have made mistakes, we have been careful to print corrections in the next issue. We hope that this side of The Gamecock will not be totally forgotten. One final note ? an apology to John Bryan, who received what he merited on Awards Day but got much less than he deserved from The Gamecock. 2 taff group, fifty more showed up to get in line. Some were your friends. Thank you for not being intimidated. To the interest groups, thank you also. It is only right that you seek recognition. It shows devotion to your organization or interest and that is a virtue in itself. This university, as well as any other, is made up of special interest groups. In fact, there are few things in this world that do not involve groups. It's a part of human nature. A very special thanks goes to Mickey Trimarchi and Karen Wooten in production. Hey you two, I know we were a pain at times (maybe even a little more often) so thanks for being here when we needed you. Mickey, I don't know what to say, good luck seems inapf>ropriate, you won't need any uck to make it ? just keep on doing what you do! John West Editor-in-Chief Gamecock's editor To the Editor: CQptUred TeSpeCt I am responding to Fred Lethbridge and others who have appointed themsleves almighty judges of journalism in general here at USC, the Algernon Sydney Sullivan award and The Cl m onnplr in viuiiiwwn in pal ucuiitl . I do not know Jonathan W. Bryan personally, so I cannot comment on whether or not he was worthy of the award. The awards committee obviously thought he merited it, and if they were mistaken, those self appointed judges have already overkilled the subject anyway. My objection is to unjustified and uncalled for slander of the Gamecock and its present editor, John West. Mr. Bryan is not the only member of the Board of Publications, and he did not personally appoint John as editor. As a member of The Gamecock staff, I too was disappointed originally over the selection of an "unknown'' (John) over a long standing and talented staff member, Mark Lundgren. But under the revised system, Mark will assume the editor position this summer and remain as editor for a full year. John proved he was not the "incompetent boob" he was projected to be, and captured the respect of the maioritv of thp staff momharc ?>k;ia ? - m w Viuwvio TTI111C UUlUg d competent job as editor, so it all worked out for the best in the end. As for Mr. Lethbridge's statement that The Gamecock has sunk to an all time low, bunk. First of all, people who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Mr. Lethbridge's leadership as sports director of WUSC left a great deal to be desired, as his failure to be reappointed indicates. His disappointment should not have come unexpected. Fred's program was reknowned for its "freakiness." Second, The Gamecock was more than adequate, considering rMmirnac if r Q wav VMA/UA WO 11/ A1CIU available this semester. And any inconsistencies the paper did have cannot be blamed on John West. They were the result of personality clashes within the paper. USC abounds with viper-tongue*! halfwits who are quick to criticize and nonexistent or slow at best to do anything about the situations they are so quick to condemn. If they were anything else, they would be too busy working to have time to gripe. Indeed, if they worked half as hard at improving the situation as they do at ciricizing, there would be nothing to gripe about. ?_ ? uuug juuey Journalism Freshman Good luck Mark If publishing a bi-weekly your work cut out for you. With paper seemed a chore at times, three months to plan and two three times weekly will be an semesters to implement and immense undertaking. To this your raw journalistic ahilitv l leave MarK L,undgren, with you should be able to put hope that he is able to enjoy his together a very good paper. I responsibilities as Editor as look forward to seeing it next much as I did mine. year. Also, because of a Board of Hey, good luck! Publications decision to make the editorship a year-long John West position, you'll definitely find _ ^ OAlVlt,tXA>K John R. West JaneShealy Editor Matt Ward | News Editor Sports Editor s Barbara Mathews ^ DonFob?s Graduate Assistant j Asst. News Editor . [ Barry Glenn Mike Hunt Dan Palma Entertainment Editor Chris Myers Copy Desk Chief .. ? Asst. Sports Editors Mark Mueller ArieneMoryjn Asst. Entertainment Editor Bill Fitzpatnck Irnuiwyiflpny t:uuor Ad Manager Karen Wooten Production Manager THE GAMECOCK welcomes letters from its readers. Letters should be limited to a single subject and a maximum of 300 words. They must be signed with the writer's true name. I Pseudonyms or other aliases will not be used, but the writer's name will be withheld if j circumstances warrant. To assist us in verifying the identity of writers, please include your mailing address and a telephone number where you can be reached. Please include class standing and major, also. We reserve the right to edit all letters, not for content, but to meet our space limitations. Address: Campus Opinion, The Gamecock, Drawer A, USC, Columbia, S. C. 29701. |