Reading The Chronicle’s official endorsement, on March 9th, entitled “Students First Is the Best Choice” made me quite upset, and aroused some rather angry and hostile feelings. And it’s not because I’m a die hard fan of PINC or a candidate desperate for votes (I am neither), but the Chronicle, in my opinion, has a history of publishing things that I really don’t think are appropriate. And taking their stand with Students First would be an example of such articles. I really don’t think it’s a school’s newspaper position to claim who they think is more qualified and suited for the presidential vote. I believe that the duty of a school newspaper is to be a good representation of what is presently going on in a neutral and purely informative manner. I think it’s immature and displays a poor sense of character for The Chronicle to take a stand on such issues. I recognize that columinists have the right to take a personal objective, but for the paper as a whole to make a public stand bothers me. So upon reading your opinions caused me to question the validity of all your articles written. When interviewing members of both political campaign’s did you only ask the questions you thought would get the answers you were looking for? To what extent are all your articles biased? Do you not have the faith that the student body would be able to make their own opinions and that you found it your personal moral duty to force your objectives on others? Or perhaps you just took a stand to arouse people into writing to your paper?
This is very similar to what happened last year. The Chrony did not take an offical stand but it was pretty obvious on how they viewed elections and who they felt were more suited. Let it be known that I think Ali and John are great candidates, I’ve talked to them both and they’re both very qualified gentlemen. I also feel the very same way about Taylor and Rob, they too are very qualified. May the best candidates win regardless of what biased-opinionated-stands-brain-washing newspapers may publish.
Rhiannon Longstaff >’.-