Sunflower funding on hold pending review

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

A top university official, meanwhile, says his concern with the Sunflower isn't free speech, but sloppy journalism.

In a document sent to the Sunflower last month, the committee cited as concerns: inaccurate reporting, one-sided stories, reporters not attending events they wrote about, misquoting, presenting opinion pieces as news stories and lifting quotes from the Internet.

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/story/382563.html

Wow. I could be a journalist for the Sunflower. At least I know how to find information, quote sources accurately, and list them for those who question the factual nature of the story.

It appears Ryan Cornelius' days of fabricating ways to put down the Shocks are nearing an end.

[RoyalShock]

Since half their funding comes from student fees, it seems this is about the only way they (students) can really have a voice in how the paper is run.

Advertisers (the other source of funding) can pull their ads, but the students can't exactly hold back their fees. I have no problem with the administration acting on behalf of the students in this way.

[ShockerFever]

What a surprise.

Bye bye Ryan.

[SFL]

It's still a great day to be a Shocker! :good:

P.S. We all needed a little good news today... this takes some of the sting away from other news.
:(

[BostonWu]

"Students have just reached a point where they're getting fed up with the Sunflower in terms of how articles are being published," said Ron Kopita, vice president for campus life and university relations.

Wow just wow. You know you're really bad when your own peers say you suck!

[SubGod22]

I don't think this news surprises anyone. The crap that they'd run was ridiculous and nothing that anybody would pay for. The only reason they've gotten away with it is because it's free and they get their money anyway.

[jocoshock]

I don't think this news surprises anyone. The crap that they'd run was ridiculous and nothing that anybody would pay for. The only reason they've gotten away with it is because it's free and they get their money anyway.

We certainly saw evidence of this on S/N with the recent rant against KU. that was discussed just a couple of weeks ago.

I'm all for free speech, but if they are going to be funded with student $$ and represent the school, they owe it to the students and the school to adhere to at least some form of journalistic standards and ethics.

If they want to publish "alternative" articles, then go the free enterprise route and start your own paper, fund it with your own $$ and stand on your own..

[rjl]

While at first it looks like a case of university officials censoring the Sunflower--which I am TOTALLY against in every possible meaning of the word--the reality is that they are censoring the QUALITY rather than the CONTENT.

If you are going to say KU is a bunch of cheaters or whatever, fine. But you'd better have the facts to back it up, otherwise you come off as kind of an idiot on a pulpit. Who the hell would then give any credence to subsequent articles of yours?

Lazy journalism shouldn't be tolerated.

[RoyalShock]

I don't even see this as censorship. I see it as the only avenue for the students who fund half of the newspaper to have their say in how it's run without resorting to illegal behavior.

It just so happens that the aforementioned avenue is partially funded by tax dollars.

[martymoose]

Thank God, it's about time somebody shut those idiots up...Now hopefully they can get some people in there to write a quality paper.

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

You know they are just going to hire some other "Qualified" Eagle intern/part-time reporter to run it.

I really think since it is funded by the taxpayers and students, and not owners and advertising, that they should have a Faculty Advisor.

[SpanglerFan316]

You know they are just going to hire some other "Qualified" Eagle intern/part-time reporter to run it.

I really think since it is funded by the taxpayers and students, and not owners and advertising, that they should have a Faculty Advisor.

If so ("they should have a Faculty Advisor"), then WSU assumes liability. As it is, WSU is starting to get bad national press over this issue (e.g. NPR). A lot of people think of the Sunflower as a place to learn and to make mistakes and that "kids will be kids." I have very mixed feelings about this whole issue and wonder if it might have been better to ignore the Sunflower (since everyone else does).

I would not mind if the quality of reporting in the Sunflower improves. I am concerned about the consequences of this action by Kopita, especially down the road. As potentially future journalists, the Sunflower staff might someday be writers with an axe to grind against WSU (and, as with BCS sports reporting, they might claim to be "fair and balanced" as they trash WSU or Wichita).

[SubGod22]

From what I've seen of the Sunflower writing I'd be suprised if any of them have a future in the business.


But then again, reporting as a whole has gotten so crappy over the years I'm sure a few might find jobs.