Haircut - 10/15/12

4
HAIRCUT October 15, 2012 Buzzsaw Magazine’s M ore than 50 students gathered in Peggy Ryan Williams on Friday morning in pro- test of President Tom Rochon’s new me- dia policy. The group walked to the Free Speech Rock before relocating to the third floor of Cam- pus Center. Right before noon, they moved to the hallway outside of Taughannock Falls Meeting Room in hopes of confronting members of the Board of Trustees as they left the room. Students stood against the wall holding signs and chanting, “don’t oppress the student press” and “Board of Trustees, keep the press free.” The protest was in reaction to a new media policy issued on Oct. 1 that requires student media outlets seeking interviews with college administrators about school policy to submit all interview requests through the Ithaca College Office of Media Relations. The policy encom- passes 84 administrators, including school deans, student services faculty, financial and admissions personnel and President Rochon. President Rochon informed the staff of Buzz- saw magazine – as well as the staffs at The Itha- can, WICB and ICTV – about the terms of the new policy last week, stressing that it was not designed as a roadblock to students’ access to the college administration. In response, students and faculty issued letters to the editor and requests for repeals to cam- pus media outlets and online. But some students, like senior Dylan Lowry, felt that the Board of Trustees or President Rochon would not receive published material. Lowry, who held a sign reading “Fight for Your Right to Publish,” said he attended the protest in solidarity with the journalism program. “This [protest] was an attempt to uphold Itha- ca’s integrity … because I think the new policy does compromise the integrity of student press,” Lowry said. Senior Brennin Cummings worked with sev- eral other Park School of Communications stu- dents to plan and market the event using Face- book and Twitter. Cummings said she thought the protest conveyed a strong message from the student body. “We made sure to keep our protest peace- ful, calm and rule abiding because we wanted our complaints to be taken seriously,” Cummings said. After each member of the Board of Trustees left the room, Cummings and other organizers passed out fliers stating the goals of the protest. Once all members had exited the room, the event ended and students returned to class. “I think it was a necessary step to show the people that have the power to revoke the policy how much we care about it and how much we think it’s bullshit,” Lowry said. ___________________________________ Emily Miles is a senior journalism major. Email her at [email protected]. Students Protest NEW Media Policy By Emily Miles Photo by Emily Miles

description

Haircut issue on Ithaca College's new media policy.

Transcript of Haircut - 10/15/12

Page 1: Haircut - 10/15/12

HAIRCUTOctober 15, 2012

Buzzsaw Magazine’s

More than 50 students gathered in Peggy Ryan Williams on Friday morning in pro-test of President Tom Rochon’s new me-

dia policy. The group walked to the Free Speech Rock before relocating to the third floor of Cam-pus Center.

Right before noon, they moved to the hallway outside of Taughannock Falls Meeting Room in hopes of confronting members of the Board of Trustees as they left the room.

Students stood against the wall holding signs and chanting, “don’t oppress the student press” and “Board of Trustees, keep the press free.”

The protest was in reaction to a new media policy issued on Oct. 1 that requires student media outlets seeking interviews with college administrators about school policy to submit all interview requests through the Ithaca College Office of Media Relations. The policy encom-passes 84 administrators, including school deans, student services faculty, financial and admissions personnel and President Rochon.

President Rochon informed the staff of Buzz-saw magazine – as well as the staffs at The Itha-

can, WICB and ICTV – about the terms of the new policy last week, stressing that it was not designed as a roadblock to students’ access to the college administration.

In response, students and faculty issued letters to the editor and requests for repeals to cam-pus media outlets and online. But some students, like senior Dylan Lowry, felt that the Board of Trustees or President Rochon would not receive published material.

Lowry, who held a sign reading “Fight for Your Right to Publish,” said he attended the protest in solidarity with the journalism program.

“This [protest] was an attempt to uphold Itha-ca’s integrity … because I think the new policy does compromise the integrity of student press,” Lowry said.

Senior Brennin Cummings worked with sev-eral other Park School of Communications stu-dents to plan and market the event using Face-

book and Twitter. Cummings said she thought the protest conveyed a strong message from the student body.

“We made sure to keep our protest peace-ful, calm and rule abiding because we wanted our complaints to be taken seriously,” Cummings said.

After each member of the Board of Trustees left the room, Cummings and other organizers passed out fliers stating the goals of the protest. Once all members had exited the room, the event ended and students returned to class.

“I think it was a necessary step to show the people that have the power to revoke the policy how much we care about it and how much we think it’s bullshit,” Lowry said.___________________________________Emily Miles is a senior journalism major. Email her at [email protected].

Students Protest NEW Media PolicyBy Emily Miles

Photo by Emily Miles

Page 2: Haircut - 10/15/12

Last week, Ithaca College President Tom Ro-chon issued a new media policy that requires that student media outlets seeking interviews with college administrators must submit all interview requests through the Ithaca College Office of Me-dia Relations. The policy encompasses 84 admin-istrators, including school deans, student services faculty, financial and admissions personnel, and – of course – President Rochon.

President Rochon informed the staff of Buzz-saw magazine – as well as the staffs at The Ithacan, WICB, and ICTV – about the terms of the new policy last week, stressing that it was not designed as a roadblock to students’ access to the college administration.

However, the Buzzsaw editorial board, Buzzsaw staffers, and Buzzsaw alumni firmly reject the no-tion that the new media policy “will not be a hin-drance to [our] pursuit of information.” In fact, the policy seems to be specifically designed to hinder student journalists from accessing administrators in a timely manner and relaying information about the college to the student body.

As current students and alumni committed to

truth, transparency, and critical examination of our surroundings, this new policy flies in the face of everything we are taught to practice as journal-ists. We are taught to pursue stories of interest to our college, city, and alumni communities. We are taught to respectfully and thoroughly investigate stories by speaking with a wide and diverse array of sources. And we are taught to criticize unneces-sary bureaucratic barriers and attempts at censor-ship when we see them.

That’s why we are formally declaring our sup-port for the repeal of the new media policy, joining a chorus of voices who have spoken out against the policy – including the Student Government Association, The Ithacan, over 60 Ithaca College staff and faculty members, and hundreds of Ithaca College students and alumni.

College policies should exist to strengthen – not limit – the academic learning environment. We ask the administration to recognize the dangers of this policy, rescind it, and push our college toward the open, transparent community that we know it can and should be.

- The Buzzsaw Magazine Editorial Board

LETTER FROM THE EDITORS

Opinion:

HAIRCUTHair CutterHair DresserHair StylistHair Sweepers

Emily MilesCarly Sitzer

Danielle WestKacey Deamer

Marianna GarcesRachael Lewis-Krisky

David LurveyGena Mangiaratti

Meagan McGinnesKayla Reopelle

Anika SteppeFrancesca Toscano

Jenni Zellner

Views expressed in this newsletter are not nec-essarily those of the editorial staff or of Ithaca

College. Feedback and contributions should be sent to [email protected].

Special thanks to Campus Progress for funding this issue.

A Buzzsaw magazine publication.

Visit us at:BUZZSAWMAG.ORG

I’ve heard an interesting range of reactions to IC’s new media policy, but more interesting still

have been the community’s reactions to the pro-test itself. Over the past week, as I discussed the topic with classmates and friends, I occasionally heard the repeal movement and protest referred to as “uninformed” and “overreacting”.

Is the repeal effort an overreaction to the new policy? Not from where I stand.

A broad range of actions has been taken by students, some more serious than others, but the intention at the heart of the movement is to start a dialogue with those who put the policy in place. Aside from President Rochon’s response in The Ithacan last Wednesday, the administra-tion has remained fairly silent on the issue. The conversation has been one-sided in a way that seems unhealthy for the dynamics of the college community.

But “uninformed?” As a student journalist who sympathizes with the movement’s goal to repeal the policy, that reaction made me cringe. As with any large movement, there remains a range of attitudes within the group, but lately, I’ve found the expressions of some of those attitudes to be concerning and detrimental—particularly those regarding use of emotional language and the actual representation of the policy’s con-tents.

There is a place for passion in protest, but expressions of anger and emotional language do not constitute an argument. With extreme opin-ions flying around, it seems that the details of the

policy itself have become buried beneath the de-bris of argument and emotion. Our power lies in calm discourse and logical analysis of both what the policy does mean and what it might mean. We aren’t fighting the college or even the administra-tion; we’re fighting a policy.

Furthermore, since the best tool that we have is logic, any members of the community who de-cide to comment on the policy should, of course, have a full understanding of the issue. I appreciate that our student media have provided an ardent discussion, in school-affiliated publications and otherwise. However, from what I’ve seen, some aspects of this coverage haven’t been entirely accurate. In particular, the claims I’ve heard that the new media policy actually violates our First Amendment rights.

Our voices are not being directly censored by this policy. While the First Amendment protects our rights as student reporters to speak and publish about the goings-on on our campus, in-cluding administrative decisions, it does not mean that the administration or any other potential sources technically owe us any information or in-terviews. Just as we have the right to investigate, they have the right to choose whether or not they want to serve as sources.

Of course, as a journalist and a student who cares about the community, I strongly believe that it would be wrong for the administration to avoid responding to student media, or to nar-rowly filter its responses. The example of a silent administration is extreme, but I’m concerned by

the reality of Media Relations choos-ing our sources. It’s imperative that stu-dent media remain entirely separate from the college’s public relations. While the kind of administrative transparency that we’d like to count on isn’t protected under the First Amendment, I think it’s fair for us to expect it from an ethical administrative assembly.

This distinction between Amendment-based and ethically-based wrongs makes a difference. It’s important to protest not just that the poli-cy is wrong, but also to explain why it’s wrong. Though most students seem to have the right idea, if an individual speaks against the policy but misrepresents the facts, it undermines the cred-ibility of the whole movement. Overall, I’ve been impressed by the number of students who have demonstrated their support for the repeal of the policy, but it’s important that we remember that credibility is everything, and when involved in any movement—or any sort of professional pursuit at all, really—it’s something we really need to protect.________________________________Karen Muller is a junior IMC major. Email her at [email protected].

Karen Muller

Page 3: Haircut - 10/15/12

DaveMaley Directors

Vice PresidentsAssociate Vice Presidents

Provost

Deans

Assistant DeansAssociate Deans

President Tom Rochon

Breakdown of the New IC Media Policy

President

* The policy requires Dave Maley to serve as media relations liasion between student media and admin-istratos

Associate Director of Media Relations

Opinion: Robert Hummel Guest CommentaryMy time at Ithaca College has been brief. As

a freshman, scared of my own shadow, I mostly try to keep my obligations in check, my concerns to myself. Frankly, it takes a lot of effort to assimilate into the regular rhythms of the college campus. And though I try to become involved in a number of ways, especially as a staff member of Buzzsaw Magazine, I normally cannot be bothered to give a damn about things that do not directly relate to my immediate concerns.

I am not a journalism major. I have not mem-orized the First Amendment word-for-word. I’m a rookie writer on campus, my only training coming from my humble high school newspaper. The point is: when it comes to the tangle of jar-gons and standards of college journalism, I do not know much of anything.

However, I do know when my rights, and the rights of my fellow student journalists are being violated. And that is something I do give a damn about.

The administration’s new media policy is a sinister, suspicious move by the college, and a surprising one given the towering reputation of IC’s journalism department. Moreover, it is dis-respectful to the reporters attempting to com-municate college activity to students in an effec-tive manner.

The way I perceive it, the policy is an indirect snub, essentially telling student journalists that administrators have better things to do than talk to the press. By extension, it shows disdain for the student body in general, who have no other way of receiving information about administra-tive activity beyond puffy press releases after the fact.

To say that taking the time to properly explain important topics to the press distracts from an

administrator’s “ac-tual job,” as Presi-dent Tom Rochon claims, makes me question what these individuals think their actual jobs are, if not making decisions on behalf of the student body. Indeed, even if we are just four-year guests in their eyes, we are also major contributors to the school financially. Do we not have the right to transparency, the right to know what the administration is doing for us?

Restricting journalists from obtaining direct information from these powerful individuals in a timely and effective manner – indeed, obtaining information from them at all – is beyond unfair. Why would the school jeopardize their relation-ship with one of their most prestigious pro-grams? Is there something that they do not want us to know? Whether they like it or not, these are the kinds of thoughts that have surfaced as a result, and it could have a corrosive effect on the trust between the school and the people within it. If we cannot see clearly, we cannot see at all.

At best, the policy is a means for administra-tors to clear a few minutes of their daily sched-ule. At worst, it is a forceful violation of the bond between student and educator. Even I, a mere freshman, know that. And I will not sit still for it.__________________________________Robert Hummel is a freshman cinema and photogra-phy major. Email him at [email protected].

Dear editor,We write to express concern about the new

media policy recently instituted at Ithaca College. While President Rochon claims that this is mere-ly a way to “facilitate” interviews, it should be recognized for what it really is—an unnecessary and bureaucratic attempt to control access to information and decision-makers at the college. This new policy creates a layer of PR between journalists and their sources so that the college can make sure every story is spun to its liking.

In practice, this policy will mean that student journalists working on tight deadlines will end up with many more instances of “could not be reached for comment” in their stories. It will also mean that the administration, not the stu-dent reporters and editors, get to decide who is the most “appropriate” person to comment for a story. That is a real blow to transparency and openness at a college that supposedly prides itself on a world-class communication program. We expect this kind of controlling policy from secretive government and business entities, not from an institution that claims to cherish aca-demic and press freedoms.

As graduates of Ithaca College and former editors of Buzzsaw, we ask that the school re-scind this policy and restore open communica-tion between student media and administrators.Sincerely,

Kiley Edgley, ‘06 Emily Gallagher, ‘06Jeremy Levine, ‘06 Jessica McCoy, ‘06Emily McNeill, ‘08 David Cooper Moore, ‘06Kate Sheppard, ’06

Page 4: Haircut - 10/15/12

Opinion: Carly Sitzer2,027. That’s how many of us made up the class

of 2013 my freshman year.2,027 minds relaxing as the deposit check was

sent in; 2,027 awkward faces smiling for ID pic-ture at orientation; 2,027 lottery numbers fight-ing HomerConnect for freshmen housing; 2,027 hungry stomachs waiting impatiently for Sunday brunch at the Terraces; 2,027 voices complaining when the weather turned cold in early October.

2,027 reasons why Ithaca College was the right school—but for me, there was always only one reason I became a member of the overwhelming class of 2013: The Department of Journalism.

I didn’t come to Ithaca College because I wanted to be a student. I came to Ithaca College because I wanted to be a journalist.

The curriculum promises active education. We aren’t just told what makes a good story—we write good stories. The line between the class-room and the newsroom blurs a little more every-day as we apply those technical skills—in writing, interviewing, editing, designing and more.

And once we’re armed with these abilities, we go deeper by learning the rights and responsibili-ties; the problems facing journalists historically and currently, ethically and legally. As journalists, we look for every side of the story. In exchange—with classes like Ethics, History, Government and Media, Independent Media and more—we are given the entire story.

We are taught how to be journalists and then what it means to be a journalist. Rather than be-ing questioned, we are encouraged to question the world around us. For me, the goal was never about my grade. The assessment of my education, I always believed, was its “real world” value. Despite the exams, required blog entries, deadlines, articles and an impossibly long research paper, I never felt like I was being tested.

Until now.By instituting this new media policy, President

Tom Rochon has successfully gone against every-

thing I have been taught as a journalist.With the new system that filters not only the

sources, but also their messages, it completely un-dermines our ability as journalists to determine who is the most appropriate source to contact, a skill we learn heavily in Journalism Research.

This controlled and limited dialogue and prohi-bition of multiple perspectives diminishes our abil-ity to act honestly and independently, a virtue held high in Journalism Ethics, while impeding the goal of upholding the value of objectivity.

This is the kind of bureaucratic self-interest that Independent Media warns us about: when self-interested groups not only get involved in the content, but also in the nature of the messages being disseminated.

The new policy sounds eerily similar to the efforts of Edward Bernays, who—according to Journalism History—rocked the journalism world with his innovative notions of public relations and propaganda.

Journalism History also exposed us to people like Walter Lippmann, who believed that journal-ists were to serve as the middlemen between poli-cymakers and the public. He explored how, when too much access to the public is given to a single source of authority, democracy is threatened. This allows propaganda to thrive.

Noam Chomsky’s propaganda model suggests that one of the most influential ways institutions (in this case, the college) can promote self inter-ests, is by controlling media sources as a way to filter their own agenda to the public.

By this definition, the goal of President Ro-chon’s new policy is perpetuating propaganda dressed as a poorly disguised effort to focus on his “actual job.”

Unfortunately for the President, I have an “ac-tual job” as well.

In my education, I have come to believe that it is the responsibility of the journalist to serve the

public by acting as a watchdog to gov-ernments, adminis-trations and other authorities that may abuse power. I uphold the Soci-ety of Professional Journalist’s goal to “Seek the truth and report it,” and to do so while acting ac-countably and inde-pendently.

Lippmann warned future journalists to learn to recognize the difference between “news” and “facts.” It may be the “news” that will orchestrate student journalists through Dave Maley, but that won’t stop anyone from seeking the truth and re-porting.

I have been lucky in my three years on campus that I’ve been encouraged to learn in a way that is engaging and think in a way that is critical.

At the core of information gathering is six seemingly easy questions: Who? What? When? Where? Why? and How?

When it came to defining my own identity as a journalist, I knew the who was taken care of, and the how and what would be covered along the way. However, it wasn’t until my involvement with the student media that are currently being threatened that I began to formulate an answer to the why.

Why am I a journalist? Simply put, because of issues like this. Because as a journalist, I have a voice and I’m going to use it. I’m part of a world that’s constantly evolving and always learning. I’m in an environment where I’m not just welcome to, but encouraged to question authority and the world around me.

I had accepted that I had an impossibly long deadline for when and where this dream of be-coming a “real” journalist would become a real-ity—although, ideally, it would occur in Manhattan, immediately after graduation.

But if this policy raised my awareness to any-thing, it’s that it’s happening here and now.

We’re journalists—not journalism students, or even student journalists. It doesn’t take a diploma, a byline or inclusion on an exclusive list to iden-tify who we are or what we do. We’re defined by an underlying drive and common goal to spread the truth to create engaging conversation and in-formed citizens—despite efforts to stop that.

I chose Ithaca because I needed an environ-ment that fostered that kind of passion. I chose to be one little fish in a big pond of 2,027.

But I didn’t choose journalism—it chose me. Because whether there are 2,027 voices, 2 million voices or one overpowering voice, there are some voices that can’t be silenced. ____________________________________ Carly Sitzer is a senior journalism major. Email her at [email protected]

I guess that’s why they call it a media circus...”