Writers misrepresent Rokita

Friday's Indiana Daily Student article covering Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita's visit for the IU Republican Women's speaker series "Something to Talk About" did not accurately represent the ideas expressed at the event. Rokita's comments about Hurricane Katrina were in response to a question asked by an audience member who actually paid attention.\nRokita stated that the federal government should only be one part of the entire relief process, not the only source. The government's chain of command begins with city government and Homeland Security, progresses to state government and culminates with the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The federal government cannot legally swoop in without the permission of the state. In his speech, Rokita suggested a different tactic: unity. Citizens should lend a helping hand when disaster strikes so others do not have to wait for the government. \nMs. Garrison and her editors chose to focus on a "controversial" quotation out of context, rather than report the actual topics of Mr. Rokita's speech. Contrary to what the IDS headline would have its readers believe, Mr. Rokita did not spend 90 minutes discussing Katrina. He spent that time talking about election reform, voter IDs, his duties as secretary of state and his recent trip to Vietnam. \nCovering a speech is not about highlighting controversy in order to fit the preconceived notions of a reporter; it is about accurately reporting what the speaker said. This lack in coherence -- a headline that did not match the story and a story that did not match the event -- reduced the article to journalistic fluff. The IDS sold out and misrepresented the IU Republican Women and Todd Rokita in the process. \nTuesday's staff editorial, "This is not the USSR.," only further emphasizes the poor judgment of the IDS staff. For those unfamiliar with the process, this is how a staff editorial works: A group of IDS writers circle up while an opinion editor paraphrases a recent news article. They then discuss the article, make judgments and write an editorial based on a group consensus. Not one person serving on the editorial board attended Rokita's speech. How then does the IDS justify the editorial representing the "paper's view"?\nSeveral IDS staff members justified the mismatched headline and account of the speech by commenting on how "boring" an accurate article would have been. Tell me, which comes first in the hierarchy of ethical journalism: an accurate yet unexciting account of what actually happened or a self-serving sensational story? Another staff member stated that Todd Rokita was a public figure and therefore had to be held responsible for his comments. Taking quotations out of context changes their meaning, regardless of the speaker's place in the public eye. If a writer misconstrues, misleads or deceives, the writer is wrong. They have recklessly dismissed their duty as objective journalists. It is a question of integrity, and the IDS has failed.\nWriting a column on a subject the board knows nothing about illustrates the standards and values of the IDS, and as a former columnist, I am disappointed.