04-01-2024, 07:56 PM
I think we're expecting a lot from a college sophomore. As I read the article, he's blending reporting and op-ed a bit. If I were to speculate on the author's motive for writing the article, it might be calling out a phenomenon on campus that makes the author, and other people the author knows who share his ethnicity, feel attacked and unwelcome. In the context of writing for the Stanford Daily, I think it's more clearly appropriate to call that out and say that it's unacceptable. I think the problem you identify is with the platform. It's unusual for a college sophomore to get ~5,000 words in The Atlantic! I can understand a view that the author had a responsibility to decline the platform or to adjust the article to reflect the platform, but I think that's asking a lot of a 19 year old.
With that said, as I noted in my comment above, I agree with you that it's misleading to suggest that Stanford's campus is unique. Jewish people in the U.S. feel attacked and unwelcome in many contexts these days. But it's probably fair for the author, and The Atlantic, to imply that the phenomenon is worse on college campuses than in the rest of society.
You also make the argument that the author had an obligation to disclose his religion at the top of the article. As a lay person without significant training in journalism, I don't know whether that's a valid criticism. I see a lot of articles that address hot button issues where the author never discloses a connection to the issue when the only connection is gender, religion, ethnicity, etc. But maybe that practice is as bad as it is frequent. My instinct tells me, however, that there are pros and cons to requiring immediate disclosure of such immutable characteristcis. In my area of expertise (litigation), a judge need not disclose gender identity, religion, national origin etc., even if that characteristic might be expected by some to influence the judge's decision. My understanding is that it would be considered more problematic to call out such characteristics, potentially disqualifying judicial officers on impermissible grounds. I can see an analogous argument here, which is that the audience would be more likely to stop reading the article if it perceived the article as coming from a biased source. Acknowledging that there are downsides as well, I think there's value in reading the article as if it were coming from a disembodied author, and then evaluating whether the author's identity is material.
With that said, as I noted in my comment above, I agree with you that it's misleading to suggest that Stanford's campus is unique. Jewish people in the U.S. feel attacked and unwelcome in many contexts these days. But it's probably fair for the author, and The Atlantic, to imply that the phenomenon is worse on college campuses than in the rest of society.
You also make the argument that the author had an obligation to disclose his religion at the top of the article. As a lay person without significant training in journalism, I don't know whether that's a valid criticism. I see a lot of articles that address hot button issues where the author never discloses a connection to the issue when the only connection is gender, religion, ethnicity, etc. But maybe that practice is as bad as it is frequent. My instinct tells me, however, that there are pros and cons to requiring immediate disclosure of such immutable characteristcis. In my area of expertise (litigation), a judge need not disclose gender identity, religion, national origin etc., even if that characteristic might be expected by some to influence the judge's decision. My understanding is that it would be considered more problematic to call out such characteristics, potentially disqualifying judicial officers on impermissible grounds. I can see an analogous argument here, which is that the audience would be more likely to stop reading the article if it perceived the article as coming from a biased source. Acknowledging that there are downsides as well, I think there's value in reading the article as if it were coming from a disembodied author, and then evaluating whether the author's identity is material.
When I registered here in 2014, TrumpCard seemed like an apolitical user ID...