Where do we cross the line between being friendly and supporting Mesa State College and reporting news that exposes the flaws?

As a news outlet, one of The Criterion’s main goals is to report fair, accurate and truthful information. Sometimes the truth is dirty and doesn’t present the college in the best light.

Recently, a controversy erupted when the idea to report about underage athletes drinking habits came across the editorial board table. The argument took two distinct sides, proponents said that it is our duty to report the truth, and if underage athletes are drinking, we should cover the issue so the problem can be resolved. The opponents said that if we did a story, the newspaper could ruin opportunities for athletes to keep scholarships, or we could even damage athletic programs.

So the question became: how much reporting is too much? When do we stop to consider our alliance with Mesa State departments and the repercussions our stories could have on those departments?

It is important to inform you about our motivation. As students of journalism, we think that it is an important function to be a watchdog. The media report about flaws in the system because bringing flaws into the public eye is a good step toward resolving those problems.

The Criterion has taken on such stories in the past. We have called out faculty members who were taking advantage of students by making students pay for, use and rip out pages of the textbook that he wrote. Also, the book couldn’t be returned after the class was over. This didn’t put the faculty in a good light, but it did bring about change.

In the same way, if we were to do a story on underage drinking by members of Mesa State College athletics, it would be to fix a flaw in the system, if a flaw was even found. But it is also our duty as journalists to investigate all sides of every story.

With the opinion piece that was run about the professor using his textbook in classes, the Criterion gave that professor an option to write his own rebuttal column. In addition to talking to students, the columnist spent several hours talking to the professor so that the piece would accurately reflect both sides.

A story about the drinking habits of student athletes would not cut any corners. Coaches would be talked to as well as the schools officials. NCAA official rules and practices would also be looked into. A story this big would take all of the sides into consideration before running.

The fact remains that if we found flaws in the athletic department, which we have not, we would publish the story because it is one of the roles and responsibilities of a paper – to report the truth, even it is ugly.