Dear Editor:
The article written by Clark Castle on the SMU quarterbackcontroversy on Thursday was greatly disappointing to read from ajournalistic point of view. The dependence on anonymous sources waspoorly executed and one should understand that the journalisticethics involved were not adhered to in at all.
When using anonymous sources in journalism, a journalist mustnever rely too much on their credibility and acknowledge that theopinions of anonymous sources need to be supported by twoadditional identified sources so that the piece may uphold itscredibility with readers.
The bigger issue here is not only the repetitive usage ofanonymous sources but the idea that The Daily Campus haslowered its standard to that of “yellow journalism” andaccepts stories for the mere fact of providing content and hopingto spur on readership through enticing coverage.
It is sad to think that a losing football program finds itnecessary to offer Richard Bartel up as their sacrificial lamb, asif he is the sole cause for the disaster of this season.Additionally, I would hope that in reading an article such as theone written Thursday one might be inclined to wonder why, in thiscase, the use of anonymous sources seems to be the only outlet forinformation.
Does it not frighten anyone else that the comments have onlycome from anonymous sources? Does it not lead one to believe thatthere are obvious underlying issues and problems within thefootball program?
When writing an article such as this, one must first ask themself what is their journalistic purpose in writing it? Answer: toprovide readers with relative and impacting information to theirlives in some way. This article provided the readers with no morenew information and merely castes a bad light on Bartel and thefootball program that is already struggling to maintain respectablestatus. Bartel will not be returning for the spring semester, sowhat good does it do to further blemish his reputation, which hasalready been dragged through the mud by news organizations likeyourself.
Furthermore, I think that the editorial on the resignation ofStudent Senate secretary Ashley Earnest was also covered in poortaste and was only a blow to her personal character. Where do you,the editorial board, get off in knowing anything about thesituation at hand? Where does the editorial board get off? How didthey become the voice of the students? It is our decision to makeand it is our right to execute that freedom.
This is only my opinion and I realize that, I too, as ajournalist try to seek the most enticing stories to increasereadership. Having said that I encourage The Daily Campus tostep back and take a look at just what kind of reporting is takingplace on a regular basis.
Kristen Sudela
Junior broadcast journalism major
