Daily Bruin flubs facts
I am disappointed by the lack of journalistic professionalism
displayed in the inaccurate reporting in the editorial
“Partisanism taints USAC appointment” (Jan. 30).
I attended the January 28 Undergraduate Students Association
Council meeting as a representative of the Disabled Students Union
(of which I am president) ““ not as a representative of the
Associated Students of UCLA Board of Directors or a S.U.R.E.
supporter as is implied in the editorial ““ because the
appointment of an involved and concerned facilities commissioner is
critical to the welfare of students with disabilities, as issues of
accessibility fall within the jurisdiction of this position.
I was very surprised when I read the editorial two days later
that described me as “excitedly taking pictures of Pearlman
as he was being sworn in.” Sure, I was taking pictures, but I
was taking them for the expressed purpose of providing a picture
for Daily Bruin News writer Menaka Fernando’s story, because
The Bruin’s photographer had left earlier ““ a fact
invariably left out of the editorial.
Fernando left during the swearing-in, and because there was no
representative from The Bruin present, one must wonder where they
got the information that I was not only taking pictures, but
“excitedly” doing so.
The only viable explanation is that the Editorial Board got
their information from a third-party source. As somebody who
interned at the paper in the Arts & Entertainment section, I
know writers focus on getting the facts straight, double-checking
sources, and getting the whole story before going to print.
Hopefully, the Editorial Board will take a page out of their own
rule book, and check out their sources before they print mere
speculation as fact.
We deserve better from The Bruin.
Dria Fearn
President of Disabled Students Union
Undergraduate member of ASUCLA board of directors
Editorial Board is a waste of ink
OK, Daily Bruin, I’ve kept my mouth shut for a long time,
but enough is enough: The Bruin editorials are an offense to the
art of the persuasive essay (yes, I’m an English student).
While I agree with many of the ideas, more often than not the
editorials themselves are ill-informed, hypocritical and poorly
argued.
Case in point: In the editorial, “Union fee hike would
directly benefit Bruins” (Feb. 5), you support raising
student union fees while opposing increased student fees. Your
attempt to justify this blatant contradiction is even more flimsy:
because of “poor planning by state politicians” we
shouldn’t increase student fees. Yet you seem to forget that
a few paragraphs above you make it clear that part of the reason
Associated Students of UCLA is hurting financially (thus the desire
for raising union fees) is because of their own “poor
business model.” This example may seem small (there were a
few other contradictions in the article), but similar cases happen
so frequently that your daily diatribes become spineless and
downright ridiculous. Please, I beg of you: Think through and
read your arguments before you publish them ““ or just stop
wasting ink on them!
Corey Chapman
Fourth-year, English and history
Needed, diverse views found in Viewpoint
In regard to the editorial, “Professor bias doesn’t
always hinder learning,” (Feb. 4) I, too, believe it is both
unrealistic and counterproductive for a professor to feign
neutrality in his or her teaching.
However, the student body benefits much more when it is exposed
to a breadth of diverse viewpoints and ideas rather than simply
being limited to the exposure of one side of the political
spectrum. When 90 percent of academia espouse the same political
views, students encounter these limitations.
Until some sort of concerted effort is made to attract
professors with views that diverge from the academic mainstream,
the only regular exposure to differing and unpopular views for UCLA
students will be the Viewpoint section of the Daily Bruin.
Mark Punzalan
Class of 2001