The editors of the University of Massachusetts student newspaper, the Daily Collegian, made a difficult choice in one of their most recent issues.
Instead of a full front page of news content, complete with stories and pictures, the Collegian ran a full page advertisement in lieu of tradition.
When this topic was brought up amongst our editorial staff, there was a great deal of conflict over whether the Collegian’s Editor-in-Chief made the right decision.
We were divided. Was the ad an example of innovation or a blatant disregard for journalistic standard?
With a little more digging, we had decided. This was a destruction of traditional journalism.
“We’d be lying if we said times weren’t a bit tough and all is not so quiet on the financial front,” said Stephen Hewitt, Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Collegian, in defense of his decision to run the ad.
The newspaper is certainly having funding issues; they have recently reduced daily circulation and eliminated the Friday edition of the paper. The front page advertisement is just one piece of the puzzle for solving their financial woes, according to Hewitt.
But not everyone sees it that way. There is a public Facebook thread in which former members of the Daily Collegian had harsh words for the current editorial staff.
“A steep price to pay for a few extra bucks,” said Paul Bradley, who worked for the Daily Collegian in the past.
There then was a comment about the placement of the paper’s slogan.
“And the worst thing is the pain of seeing the paper’s slogan in the corner in this context: ‘A free and independent press,’ ” said Teresa Hanafin, another former staff member.
In Hewitt’s letter explaining the front page, he noted that the ad may raise red flags. But it truly raises them in the wider context of journalism.
Is it acceptable to compromise content for a few extra dollars?
The front page has long had a history as the face of the newspaper. So what does having an ad as the paper’s face say? Is the press as “free and independent” as the Collegian’s logo claims?
While the need to innovate is certainly understandable, the move was far too drastic, especially for a paper that “is in a rather uniquely fortunate position, with a community that remains vested in supporting collegiate journalism,” as Hewitt claims of the Collegian.
The Daily Collegian ultimately had nothing to gain from this ad other than revenue; an ad which offered nothing to the readers.
While the plight of print is well-documented, sacrificing the front page of the paper for a few dollars of ad revenue seems like a small splash in the pond. The world of journalism is constantly changing, but a move like this is a step in the wrong direction, no matter the price.