Your op-ed page is the one facet of The Daily Campus that trulybelongs to the SMU community. Distinctive in its approach andengagement with the student body, the opinion page is not so much apart of the paper, as it is a part of the discourse of SMU thatgets recorded and published for the purpose of furtheringdiscussion on any topic or issue that members of your communityhave the courage and commitment to comment upon.

News stories, commentaries and editorials are all very differententities. What appears on the page before you does not reflect theopinions, beliefs or biases of The Daily Campus. Why do some peoplehave difficulty understanding this basic distinction?

National and local papers alike receive scathing letters to theeditor chastising the paper for a particular bias, and the writerof such criticisms cites editorials and commentaries byunaffiliated, amateur writers as the site of such bias.

The one and only op-ed news flash: opinions are biased.

With the existence of national, highly circulated papers, it isproper and absolutely necessary for that published work to offersomething in the way of “the people.” Our own op-edpage seeks to implement the values closely tied to democracy, whileproviding an important forum for free speech.

So, the opinion page publishes the opinions of people. Somepeople are erudite, sophisticated, well versed, articulate andeven-handed in their assessment of the world around them. Somepeople are ignorant and stupid. Sometimes a person’s columnweaves an extensive, durable rope that they essentially hangthemselves and their argument with. If you believe a commentary isoutrageous and the author ignorant, then write your own commentarythat proves without a doubt that the argument is completelyinsane.

The op-ed page operates on the premise of free speech (see FirstAmendment). It also operates on the submissions policy (seebelow).

The editor reserves the right to edit for length, spelling,grammar and style.

Notice that the policy makes no mention of content. Such editingwould be censorship and unfair to the community at large. If we areto preserve the open exchange of thoughts and ideas to bettereducate and inform each other, we cannot concede to the tragedy ofgroup thinking.

We can criticize, disprove, argue, scream, amend, caution andapplaud. What we cannot do is make an assessment and withhold theviews of one for not conforming to the majority opinion, even if webelieve them to be wrong.