Backin the late 19th century, publishers William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer discovered the value of shocking the public. Through their tactics of "yellow journalism" the two would compete to print the most sensational story in order to outsell the other.
These techniques have made their ways to modern times as can clearly be observed when one waits at the supermarket checkout line. Shall we read about aliens giving birth or talking goats? It's a tough decision.
Fortunately, over the last century, American newspaper readers have shown the ability to discriminate between the real news that is covered in The New York Times and the humorous drivel of The National Enquirer.
Last week Dartmouth College had its own experience with this sort of irresponsible "shock journalism." As those students who actually bother to look at The Dartmouth Review are well aware, April 19th's issue features four prominent Dartmouth students on the cover, each charged with a different offense.
Inside the paper appears a long story detailing the illegal exploits of the four students and discussing the "cover-up" by the administration. Interestingly, The Review provided no substantiated sources in the story.
This incident puts all of us students in an interesting position. How should we respond to The Review's story? Should we rush Parkhurst and demand answers? Or should we loudly bash The Review and demand apologies?
Actually neither of these answers are correct. Either way we would be giving The Review far more attention than it deserves. Rather, we should use the supermarket check out line course of action. We can either simply refuse to look at the paper, or we can read it, chuckle, shake our heads and wonder what The Review will come up with next week.
I recognize that this suggested course of action is an extremely difficult one to accept. When we see something like this, something that viciously disparages our fellow students while providing little clear evidence of wrongdoing, we feel compelled to act.
But then, what can we do?
One of the most valued freedoms in this country is that of the press. With freedom of the press come stories like this one. However, we need to realize that our founding fathers ensured freedom of the press, and writers like John Stuart Mill have championed it because they had faith in the inherent ability of each individual to not believe everything he or she reads. So we must exercise this inherent ability. We should read the litany of accusations that the paper hurls towards the four students. Then we should realize that, while the article may talk tough, there is actually very little factual evidence to support the bold statements.
Furthermore, the intelligent reader also considers what paper he is reading. After all, this is The Dartmouth Review, not The New York Times.
So we take The Dartmouth Review for what it is: a tabloid which often times generates response through the value of shock. The reader must consider what was said in the article; Mill would demand it. With a little thought the reader can quickly dismiss the absurdity.
So is that it you ask? That is all that one should do in light of the story about the four student leaders? Yes. Of course if one so desires he can speculate as to how The Review will entertain us next week. Perhaps a story on the alien conspiracy to remove beds and cause housing crunches? Something to look forward to.
