Expose:
SJSU’s Continued Struggles in Unbiased Journalism
August 28, 2009 by Kyle BradyTags: Biased Reporting, Copyright, CS146, Digital Freedoms, Digital Rights, Failed Journalism, SJSU
As required by the FTC, a Full Disclosure is available - this piece adheres to the Code of Ethics
follow the update thread for the latest chapter in the saga
In my recent dealings with SJSU's Spartan Daily, who were interested in reporting my "Beeson Debacle" story and managed to create a huge mass of journalistic failings, I have discovered just how ethically challenged the publication truly is. And now, it's even worse.
I had been told by Suzanne, the author of the original article, that they would publish a response letter and suggested I post online on my own as well. I did both, and sent the letter via email to Suzanne for publication.
Now, as can be seen from this email, I very clearly, and peacefully, illustrate my point to the readers and invite them to either contact me or investigate the issue on their own, courtesy of this site.
However, I received an email from a man named Hank Drew, apparently the Editor of The Spartan Daily, stating that they couldn't print my letter if I didn't give them permission to edit - surprise! Naturally, I didn't like the idea, but needed a rebuttal to be printed, so I gave permission to edit for length, but not content.
I received no response, and then saw the letter they printed.
click for larger
The text of their printed version, in case you can't access the files above, is as follows:
Letter to the Editor
This letter is in reponse to “Who owns your homework?” that was published on Aug. 24.
In the recent “Who owns your homework?” article from 8/24/2009, I find the manner in which I was portrayed, in addition to the issue itself, appalling.
Momentarily discarding the slant of the piece that chose to vilify me as a mere troublemaker, the argument itself is a highly important, relevant issue regarding copyright and digital freedoms for both students at large and those pursuing programming-oriented degrees that was all but ignored in favor of misinformation.
The issues of a student’s rights to their own homework do not arise in other disciplines, even when they typically reuse assignments as part of a portfolio or for other public displays - most especially Art students, English majors, and promising Business candidates. But a handful of Professors within Computer Science departments worldwide seem to
feel exempt from the general academic policies on undergraduate student works of creation.
Most worrisome, however, is the choice by the “Daily” to give the most voice and credence to the university itself while implying that the issue is still a matter of debate, with SJSU standing firmly on the side of righteousness. This is simply not true, and supporting evidence can be easily found outside the university’s propaganda machine.
Portraying this highly controversial university issue in the favor of the institution is absolutely, ethically wrong, and so is the article’s factual misrepresentation of the issue at large.
No matter the financier of a journalistic endeavor, it is generally expected that some modicum of integrity is retained independent of the funding’s source, and SJSU’s “Spartan Daily” has failed to uphold this simple ideal in a horribly epic fashion.
Kyle Brady
Student, Computer Engineering Major
When analyzing the differences between the two letters, a few things become obvious:
- It was edited for content, not length.
- Once again, any contact information or invitations for curious readers to investigate this issue for themselves has been removed.
- Proving again that The Spartan Daily is not the pinnacle of journalistic evidence, they managed to claim me as a Computer Engineering student, rather than my true Computer Science status.
I sent both Hank and Suzanne a frustrated email that expressed as much, but my concerns from the original article still remain: The Spartan Daily cannot accomplish, at least in terms of this issue or me, a single instance of competence that results in unbiased, unedited, or even factual information being distributed via their publication.
I received an email from Hank in response, but he rather ironically demanded it be private - so rather than publishing the email as a whole, I've provided a list of quotes and summaries, along with brief responses where appropriate.
As is easy to see, his email was more-or-less uncalled for, and I responded to it in a similar tone and fashion. I mention in closing that it's ironic for him to demand I not publish his emails since my own demand for my letter to be published unedited was so swiftly denied, and my follow-up demand to have it edited only for content was deftly ignored.
The saga is far from over, but it's apparent that I hit a nerve with more than one individual - maybe because there's a nugget of truth in all this?
Emails
From: Me
To: Suzanne
Date: 8/25/2009 3:28pm PST
I decided I'd [send] this to you early so you can print it for tomorrow. Do not edit, change, modify, etc. from its current form.
The link I include will not work until after Midnight tonight, so do not remove it because you can't find the page.
Response letter for printing:
In the recent "Who owns your homework?" article from 8/24/2009, I find the manner in which I was portrayed, in addition to the issue itself, appalling. Momentarily discarding the slant of the piece that chose to vilify me as a mere troublemaker, the argument itself is a highly important, relevant issue regarding copyright and digital freedoms for both students at large and those pursuing programming-oriented degrees that was all but ignored in favor of misinformation.
The issues of a student's rights to their own homework do not arise in other disciplines, even when they typically reuse assignments as part of a portfolio or for other public displays - most especially Art students, English majors, and promising Business candidates. But a handful of Professors within Computer Science departments worldwide seem to feel exempt from the general academic policies on undergraduate student works of creation.
Most worrisome, however, is the choice by the Daily to give the most voice and credence to the university itself while implying that the issue is still a matter of debate, with SJSU standing firmly on the side of righteousness. This is simply not true, and supporting evidence can be easily found outside the university's propaganda machine.
Portraying this highly controversial university issue in the favor of the institution is absolutely, ethically wrong, and so is the article's factual misrepresentation of the issue at large. No matter the financier of a journalistic endeavor, it is generally expected that some modicum of integrity is retained independent of the funding's source, and SJSU's Spartan Daily has failed to uphold this simple ideal in a horribly epic fashion.
For further details on the actual issue, as well as an analysis of the article's slant, visit kyle-brady.com/inLink/s8H0f
Kyle Brady
Student, Programmer, Writer, Entrepreneur
kyle@kyle-brady.com
From: Hank Drew
To: Me
Date: 8/25/2009 10:42pm PST
Hi Kyle,
I am the Executive Editor of Spartan Daily and I am sorry you did not enjoy our article about your situation.
I don't feel that the article was slanted at all and that certainly was not the writer or editors intention.
That said, we do not have a paper tomorrow. I can run your letter Thursday, but your demands of not editing are against our editorial policy, which are printed in every issue.
Let me know what you decide.
From: Me
To: Hank Drew
Date: 8/25/2009 11:29pm PST
Thursday is fine, and you can edit it for length, but not content.
Just be careful what you remove - the world is watching closely.
From: Me
To: Hank Drew, Suzanne Yada
Date: 8/27/2009 5:30pm PST
I have a question for you: how dense [is] your staff? Honestly, because I'm curious. Do you hire based on any set of qualifications? Or perhaps IQ level? Because it appears that you do not.
I just saw my "Letter to the Editor" that you promised to print, and, once again, you guys managed to royally fuck it up. Now screw it up, but fuck it up. Does that better express to you the scale of your incompetence?
I'm going to address this in another public forum, as well as take this "over your heads" to people of higher authority within SJSU, but I'll clue you in on a few key points in advance:
- You edited for content. I specifically, explicitly said you could only edit for length, if required. That was not a request, it was a demand - not optional.
- You removed all references to contact methods, my longer response online, and, once again, any method by which curious readers could investigate for themselves.
- You managed to pin me as the wrong major. After all of this, it shouldn't be that difficult for you to figure out what department I'm associated with - how many hours were spent pretending to "investigate" this issue? And with what Professors? Inside what Department? Oh, that's right - Computer Science. Excuse me for assuming that you have any sort of memory, or the basic ability to look me up on SJSU's systems, refer to your own published article, or even, Odin Forbid, check my profile on my site where it clearly states my major.
Once again, you've created a situation of epic failure for yourselves. Just as I'm not letting the issue with Beeson drop, this little issue with your publication is not going away any time in the future either. You can keep pretending to be a true newspaper, but I, along with many others, now know that you are not - newspapers focus on things like "fact", "truth", and "unbiased inquiry".
Maybe you should read some self-help books on the topic. May I suggest "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Journalism"?
You're an embarrassment to the industry you pretend to be a part of, and you should be ashamed of both yourselves and your complete lack of competence.
I'll be in touch.
From: Hank Drew
To: Me
Date: 8/27/2009 7:48pm PST
Summary and Quotes of a "do not print" email:
- He's "had it with [my] insulting tone", and thinks I'll receive negative repercussions for publicly defending myself against such horrible excuses for public competency
- The Spartan Daily is run by students, which he claims excuses the publication from any and all "mistakes" made
- He claims that they didn't bow to the will of the Administration, and never have or will
- I'm "more than welcome to not like the story", and he doesn't really care. Apparently I should feel lucky that they even published my "insulting rant on [their] editorial page", because the students have quotas to meet to get class credit - he ignores that they were ethically obligated to post my response letter.
- Since I didn't like how they edited my letter, their editorial policy is available for me to read - "Don't like it. Don't submit a letter to the editor."
- Then he decides to be insulting:
- "Think about who you are and what you are trying to represent. As a Linux user (Ubuntu) and a longtime reader of 2600 and BoingBoing (I was reading the paper ed. of BoingBoing while you were still in the womb), I think you are making a mockery of the opensource and digital rights movement."
- I know what I'm doing: standing up against a professor that tried to bully me for the purposes of his own laziness, and trying to get the issue presented fairly by the school paper. Nothing more, nothing less.
- He adds that he thinks I'm perusing this for blog traffic purposes, and that he is no longer going to communicate with me.
- As a closing, he uses the ever-thoughtful "Have a nice life"
From: Me
To: Hank Drew
Date: 8/28/2009 12:08am PST
Hank,
I've had it with your incompetence. We can go tit-for-tat all day long, and I'm prepared for any so-called consequences me coming after you for this may bring, so let's not have the pot calling the kettle black, ok?
Occasionally making mistakes is understandable - making critical mistakes on every public aspect in relation to me in the last week is not.
Once again, let's not jump to conclusions. First, I got permission from Stefan (both in person and via email) to use the photo. Second, the final version is pulled directly from the paper, and is visibly so. Third, the original was emailed to me by Stefan himself. Want to cry some more over milk you spilt?
I know what I'm doing - I'm not making a mockery of anyone or anything, but rather standing up to a professor that tried to bully me for purposes of his own laziness, and I'm seeing the issue through. If you don't understand this, perhaps it's because you've been reading BoingBoing since before I was born - an interesting statistic from all the emails and comments worldwide is that a certain dividing line exists in terms of age for whether or not they agree with my original actions. And apparently you are on the opposite side of it.
I don't really care whether or not you pushed someone else's content off to publish my response - you were obligated to publish it. You're the ones who have continually failed to be even partially competent, not me. If that was the case, I wouldn't be in a position to have fought Beeson in the first place, nor would I be a Computer Science student - we tend to be a bit brighter than most.
I'm not doing this to drive hits to my site (since I get decent traffic as it is anyway), but rather using the site itself as a vehicle for exposing you and your staff. This is not new, and not confined to you - it's a personal philosophy of mine to go after people when they're wrong. Ask Lawrence G. Roberts, one of the founders of the Internet, if you don't believe me. Or Tanya Harding, who recently publicized 17,000+ emails of the entire SJSU student body by, surprise!, being incompetent.
Finally, I think it's worth noting, and rather hilarious, that I have more journalistic integrity, talent, and overall writing skills [than] most of your staff - as a Computer Science student / programmer. What does that say about the company you keep? Ponder that pixel of wisdom.
Have a nice, long, slow slide into senility. I hope it's entertaining.
p.s. Emails are never private unless they're encrypted or published with legal disclaimer. Yours is neither. And consider the irony of you demanding private email conversation after denying my own demand of not editing my letter. Guess what? Publishing emails related to stories is part of my policy - if you don't like it, don't email me.
Kyle can be found on Twitter and MySpace, or reached via email.
