Editor in Chief

Usually, I'm not one to criticize fellow student journalists. Unlike breaking news and vacation days, in this industry, criticism is rarely short in supply. People are more moved to complain than they are to praise -- it's simply human nature.

But when journalists -- even ones who balance heavy course loads with heavy source lists -- print unfounded, inaccurate information about my newspaper, they cross the line.

The Daily Vanguard, Portland State University's student-run newspaper, printed an article yesterday about Vicky Triponey, a possible candidate for vice provost for student affairs.

The Daily Vanguard reported that Triponey was asked about a controversy surrounding the restructuring of student government at Penn State, where she worked until September 2007 as the Vice President for Student Affairs.

The Daily Vanguard reported that Triponey told the students and administrators present at the meeting that two campus-wide polls showed the student body found its previous government ineffective (a poll, by the way, that only 3,992 students of 40,000 participated in). So student leaders proposed a new government structure, which she helped pitch to the administration.

So far, so good, Daily Vanguard. But then, the article says:

However, Triponey said she did not dictate the contents of the new proposal. The minority number of students who did not feel student government needed change, many of whom were involved with the Collegian, began spreading false information, she said.

"It's all wrong," Triponey said.

Does Portland have a media law class? Because, newsflash: If it's untrue, it's still libel even if you attribute it to someone.

According to Collegian policy, no members of The Daily Collegian news division can be involved with student government in any capacity. It's called a conflict of interest. It's an important thing to understand if you want to be a journalist.

And on top of that inaccurate piece of information, the article goes on to quote Triponey saying the Collegian spread "false information."

If you are not aware, that is a very serious accusation against a newspaper. It questions our credibility, our accountability and our ethical standards. That is not something any newspaper should print lightly, and never without factual support.

It doesn't matter that Triponey said it and that the newspaper attributed it to her. State
College Mayor Bill Welch could say Penn State President Graham Spanier embezzles university funds. (Note: Spanier does not embezzle university funds.) But we'd never quote Mayor Welch in an article without some kind of factual support. We're not in the business of rumors.

And as much as reading that off-base accusation hurt, it was much worse that no one from The Daily Vanguard picked up the phone and called us. Usually, when someone lobs an allegation against another person, a newspaper asks that person to respond.

It wouldn't have been a lengthy conversation:

"Hey Daily Collegian, it's the Daily Vanguard. Did you spread false information about Triponey and the restructured student government? No? OK, thanks."

Perhaps because I learned to practice proper journalism, or perhaps because I just wanted answers, I called the Daily Vanguard to ask about the story -- a courtesy they did not extend to us.

"The Vanguard is not throwing that accusation out there, this is what Ms. Triponey said," the Vanguard Editor-in-Chief David Holley said.

But it's untrue. Why didn't you call us? I asked.

"Generally, we do have people check the validity. As you know, there are time constraints on everything and this was later in the day," he said, adding that he does take this seriously and the paper always strives for accuracy.

Hey, I feel that. It's after midnight, I'm trying to finish this blog, I've got a Russian book to read, a thesis to write and my sleep debt's out of control. But I just had a 10-minute phone conversation with Holley to make sure I got his side of the story.

Next time, we'd appreciate the same courtesy.

The future of The Daily Collegian is in very capable hands.

Last night, two extremely hard-working individuals were selected to lead the news and business divisions for the 2008-09 academic year. Terry Casey will serve as editor-in-chief. Stef Kemmler will serve as business manager.

It's the culmination of years of late nights, tough decisions and sacrifices that, hopefully now, seem well worth it. It's also a process seeped in tradition.

Earlier this year, the candidates prepared a proposal that stated their vision for the future of the organization. They submitted a cover letter, a resume, a list of references and an academic transcript. Last night in front of the staff, they sat before the Collegian's board of directors and answered some tough questions about their philosophies on good journalism and good management. The news and business advisers weighed in; recommendations by the staff were passed around.

After deliberation by the board, the president announced the decision in the newsroom to cheers and applause by both staffs. Then we cracked two champagne bottles, gave hasty toasts and up ended the inch of cheap champagne in honor of the future leaders.

I can remember every moment last year -- the questions I expected and the ones I didn't, the sweaty palms, the itchy suit and the feeling at the end of exhilaration and fear. And now on the other side of the process -- the one passing the torch instead of receiving it -- it's rather bittersweet.

My tenure is winding down, and now, another will carry about the weighty responsibility for a paper that so many cherish.

I can't say I'm terribly depressed just yet -- there's too much to do. Though already well versed in Collegian procedure and history, Terry has some tough decisions to make in the weeks ahead. He'll have to pick his managing editors -- in effect, his right and left hands. He'll have to pick the football reporters, one of the most sought-after beats on the paper. He'll have to set the course for the Collegian in a new school year. The possibilities and the potential are endless.

But now, we celebrate. There are way too many serious times ahead not to cherish the good ones.

And I hope it's not my inch of champagne talking, but I know I will sleep at little easier tonight with the reassurance that this paper is in very talented hands.

If you saw the opinions page on Monday, maybe you thought The Daily Collegian wanted to get in on the "endorsement fever." Maybe we saw Chuck Norris advertisements for Huckabee one too many times and declared, if he can do it, so can we.

Well, that wasn't exactly the thought process in our basement on Burrowes Street, though we're pretty convinced we could do a mean roundhouse kick. We endorse (or anti-endorse) a candidate for student government every year. Sometimes they win, sometimes they don't. In years past, I just focused on fitting the multiple interviews and lively debate into my schedule.

But this year, as the editor-in-chief, I didn't have the luxury of just numbly accepting the status quo. So as election time rolled around, I began thinking about the rationale behind the process.

Endorsing a political candidate is common, especially in local races. Newspapers have an obligation to the readers as their public servant. The editorial board has an opportunity to do what few private citizens can -- sit down with the candidate with no cameras, no audiences, no interferences -- and fire off questions that the candidate can't dodge or ignore or refuse to answer.

Sometimes journalists see a side of a candidate that the public rarely does. Whether that's just the nature of the relationship between the candidate and the media, I'm not sure. But you can learn just as much, if not more, about a candidate when he or she doesn't have a script to follow.

It is also important to remember that it is the editorial board -- not the reporters -- choosing the candidate that in their minds will best represent the public.

I've always had an unsettling feeling that people can't separate a board of editors and a reporter. Thus, the editorial only fuels accusations of bias. Because isn't it a newspaper's duty to be balanced, above all?

And for almost every single page in our paper it is. But on the opinion page, we get a chance to express just that -- our opinion. It's our chance to draw conclusions from the facts and present them to you, the readers.

Plus, in a 10-day election cycle, you probably don't have time to attend multiple debates at the HUB or track down the candidates between classes to get their stance on tuition increases. Some of you may not even know there is a student government race underway.

So we tried to help. We probed the candidates on their platforms in case you couldn't. And using all the information we learned, we chose the team we think will serve you, the students, best.

And there's a perfect outlet for you to express whether you agree or disagree: log on to elections.psu.edu today and vote.

After all, Chuck Norris can do it -- before counting to infinity. Twice.