Up until this current semester, the quality of the Shield had been greatly improving, and I felt that the reporting that was done on the Greeks last semester helped with credibility. 

What helped keep the credibility was that when a response was written to an article – when former SGA President and fraternity member Jordan Whitledge wrote a letter to the editor in response to accusations that the SGA was too Greek – Jordan’s voice was allowed to be heard on the issue. Another point of view was shown, rather than solely the writers’ opinions. After all, letters to the editor are for lending credibility by showing both sides of the story.

This semester, after I wrote a letter discounting an article by Ms. Hellman, the letter that was chosen instead was one from the President of the Black Student Union on why it is important to embrace other cultures.  His topic is a fantastic thing to write about, don’t get me wrong. But when it is brought to your attention that a writer has used misinformation on a time-sensitive issue (i.e. voting), that information should take precedence over a piece that could have been run any time. 

From what I have read this year, no opposition to any articles have been posted. Personally, as someone who has tried to voice my concerns with an article, it leads me to wonder just how many more letters haven’t been published because they go against a writer.