If only the paper would focus on the positive things the SSC does, the editors would realize that open meetings, fair elections, accountability and greater democracy aren t things that students really care about. Perhaps it s coincidence, but it seems our student government leaders have learned well the lessons of Agnew and Nixon that it s much easier to kill the messenger than to respond to the message. The whole idea of a liberal press a fallacy was created by Nixon and Agnew in the early 1970s when they began an assault on the nattering nabobs of negativity who were reporting critically on Vietnam and later Watergate. And now by making words like misrepresentation and sensationalized synonymous with critical student government carries on this Nixonian legacy. But our student government has taken neutering the press to an authoritarian level.
Most politicians routinely attack the press.
It s vulnerable and an easy target. It s only legitimate as long as people believe it maintains an aura of fairness to all parties. But here at NYU, student government has drafted and passed official sanctions on the press for when it gets out of control with its editorial policies. One recent example came early this semester when the SSC Grievance Committee held a hearing on the fairness of WSN editorial policy. A club leader had complained that his letter wasn t published, and so the SSC decided to investigate.