I love puppies!

Semester ends with disappoinment and frustration

I'd say I'm ending this semester with a few less friends and a few more enemies, but who cares, anyway? People move in and out of this city, this university and the journalism program. I'm a nomad, afterall, and I know I'll be moving on as soon as I've gotten all I need from this place.

I just feel bad for those entering my situation.

Just a note on the goings-on of the Daily:

Ryan Sholin wrote an article outlineing some of the Daily's circumstances:

"Both advertising revenue and university funds pay to print the Spartan Daily, and our newsroom is housed in a university building. Most notably, the Spartan Daily is a class. Our advisers sometimes call this newspaper "the most public laboratory on campus."

For all those reasons, this newspaper doesn't call itself independent."

I have heard an endless number of complaints about the paper, many of which I brush off because anything short of "I love puppies" will likely be disputed by somebody.

The most compelling complaint, however, is that the Daily is not student-friendly. I knew this before I was on staff when I tried to submit a story to be published to then-executive editor and next term's copy editor, John Myers. I was given some harsh words about "I have 20 writers, how dare you think you have anything worth printing?" or so I took it as this.

To clear everything up: Students aren't encouraged to submit articles. Letters to the editor, yes, but "guest" columns are by staff writers. I guess the "guest" is there more for the spirit of things.

The other day, a letter appeared showing how a staff writer had completely botched the facts in an article about the Associated Students selecting a new legal counsel. The letter was printed, sure, but only with a next-day rebuttal from a former A.S. member saying the lawyer was just bitching and A.S. was right. (I find this funny because A.S. normally can't do anything right by the Daily, but when it makes the Daily look better, the editors will let it slide. But only once, OK, A.S.? We hate you!!!!)

This seems like a newspaper just doing what it should: accepting blame and reporting all sides of the story. But I bet if a the former executive editor (whose byline reads "special to the daily" *wink*), who had been following the story, had botched the facts, the letter wouldn't have appeared. The point is likely moot because he is a relatively thorough reporter with the exception of the insinuating headline that read something like: Minors drank at retreat. (It's fixed online, I might have the print copy). A small retraction was made matching the amount of consolation given.

The Daily printed a letter to the editor that read: "Dear editor, John Myers' Tuesday guest column on the lack of responsible conduct within the Associated Students is the most insightful opinion piece I have read ... "

Here's a little insight I have gained from writing for the Daily: the editorial staff repeatedly wrote pieces on what should happen and how A.S. should be more transparent and responsible. Myers went straight from the news stories to a "guest" column to say exactly what he had implied in his "news" stories:

"A new student government should have been elected to oversee $6 million of the San Jose State University student body's money."

I once overheard his homie asking if he was going to run for student government. What is this? If you can't join 'em, beat 'em?

I'm exercising my right to free speech to expose the Daily for the self-serving bunch they are (and likely will continue to be in the fall).

It can be seen by the way the editors are selected. The two faculty advisors ask the class to shout out the names of students to be on the three-person panel to advise on the executive editor process. These are either staff writers or graduating seniors.

The people running for executive editor apply and pitch a platform and someone is selected.

They then have free reign to choose the rest of the staff.

Interviews? Hmm, only in a pinch or for show. For the most part, it's "you're my homeboy, welcome aboard," or "you look good, you're hired."

Did I get this all right? I'm open for corrections.

Enough bitching. Here are some suggestions:

Have more of the staff of the J&MC overlook the Daily's activities. Like Greene and Mack (or his successor). Have more than the two advisors choose the editors. They are not immune to the "homie syndrome."

This committee should also select (or advise on the selection of) the rest of the editorial staff. If this is too much university control, then at least suggest that the executive editor give some sort of grammar test to the potentials.

After all, most of the work is correcting punctuation and grammar. The "news selection" process is mostly just ripping off Nacy Stake's news blips on the SJSU Web site.

The grammar intuition of next term's managing editor (all news stories go through him for the first round of editing) is to spell article as "artical."

And the new exec is already busy welcoming next term's writers. He apparently became confrontational with someone in the newsroom who was printing something before class. He gladly boasted his new title: I'm the executive editor!

<-- Daily photo.

In addition to all the duties of exec, he will apparently be enforcing J&MC printing policies as well. (Incidentally, there was next to nobody in the room, the whole affair was more likely about ego.)

I will be watching the Daily from afar next term, although I've been toying with the idea of staying on as a senior writer, if only to serve as in-house critic, but maybe not because my blogging about it has been something of a problem.

I was told that bringing internal dealings of the Daily into the public forum was taboo.

Holy shit. Hippo-crit.

All those arti-c-l-e-s calling for reform from other organizations are bullshit coming from the "band of brothers" that run the Daily.

I could go on and on... and I will... but I have finals.