I think my photo may have to come down from this page if I want anyone other than Ryan Holeywell and my mother to read this blog. But enough about me. This isn’t an exercise in egotism; nor is it a place where I lay bare my innermost feelings or tell you what music I’m listening to (OK, Death Cab for Cutie).
This is an experiment in transparency. Hatchet readers pick up the paper and visit our Web site often without knowing why we do things the way we do. In making editorial decisions, staffers have debates (which can sometimes get heated), abide by written policies and look to what previous editors have done. The newspaper’s editorial decision-making process will be partly illuminated in this blog, which will basically be an extension of the “Inside our pages” column that appears once in a while in the opinions section.
I look forward to fielding questions from this blog’s readers – all five of you. I will try to make short, colloquial posts every two or three days, or whenever a controversial issue comes up, or whenever I’m feeling particularly lonely.
Have a good Thursday.
Michael Barnett
Any chance the Hatchet will get an ombudsman? Seems that when people have an issue with a Hatchet story, they have 3 options: 1) write a letter to the editor about it; 2) send angry messages to the Hatchet; or 3) do nothing about it other than grumble. If there was a Hatchet ombudsman, then unhappy readers could channel their concerns to that person who would then be able to look into them and report back to the readership. In an age of greater media transparency, this would hold the Hatchet as accountable to its audience as it holds University administrators and their decision-making.
May I assume that you wrote the Editorial regarding students not belonging on the Board of Trustees or deserve a vote there? I like your thinking. However, does “transparency” mean that students have a right to have access to both the open and closed sessions of Board meetings in order to fully understand the workings of the voting members?