The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, May 01, 1978, Page Page 27, Image 27
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. |