In regards to Natasha Raquel Bush's April 22 response to Emily Glauser's column on marijuana, I would kindly like to inform Ms. Bush a little something about journalism and the Code of Ethics. According to the Society of Professional Journalists, public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. It is a journalist's duty to seek truth and report it. The truth is marijuana use is prevalent among many students at Ohio University. To turn our backs on this issue merely for the sake of saving the reputation of the school would be a biased decision and a severe blow to the field of journalism.
Aside from that, if The Post decided not to publish Ms. Glauser's article, would it have prevented any marijuana use occurring on 4/20? The only thing that would have been accomplished was that many people would not have known about the prevalence of weed culture at Ohio University. If parents really cared about this issue, wouldn't it be more ethical to publish the article? Weed is a part of OU life, and the public has the right to know about it.
One should ask Ms. Bush a larger question: Should all national media follow her guidelines and report for the sake of reputation? Should journalists publish only articles that show the bright side of the Iraq war merely to save the reputation of the government and gain support for the country? In the same way, we shouldn't show only one side of the marijuana issue merely to save the university's reputation and gain admissions. If we amplify Natasha Bush's ideology, we're looking at a great deal of ethical decline in the field of journalism.
Raheela Rahman is a sophomore political science major studying pre-law.
17 Archives
Letter to the Editor
