On May 15, The Daily posted an updated Opinion Policy to our website. It provides a concise overview of our approach to the four types of content that fall under the scope of the Opinion Desk: op-eds, columns, letters to the editor and editorials.
In addition to the newly available policy, The Daily has crafted a set of internal guidelines that cover our approach to subjects such as criteria for accepting op-ed submissions and policies for listing signatories to articles with multiple authors.
There are three central reasons we have chosen to update our policies and write this editorial.
First, our previous standards contained ambiguities that have been tested throughout the year. We thought it important to address these ambiguities and give editors as much guidance as possible to make decisions that fall under their discretion.
Second, The Daily has come under criticism for publishing op-eds some readers felt did not meet journalistic standards. We want to make clear exactly what goes into a decision over whether or not to publish a piece and demonstrate a more intentional decision-making process.
Third, it is no secret that the state of freedom of expression in America is in an unusually uncertain position. For Northwestern and Evanston community members considering contributing to The Daily, there may be a heightened fear of repression. While it isn’t in The Daily’s remit to protect contributors from consequences in the outside world, we believe it imperative that each writer understand the conditions of their name being attached to an article.
The new policies are the result of a quarter-long collaborative process undertaken by members of The Daily’s current Editorial Board in consultation with former editors in chief and opinion editors. Below are six important areas of our guidelines to note, both established and new:
1. Anonymity
The Daily will require that each opinion piece be signed by at least one named individual. Anonymous submissions and pieces on behalf of student groups will not be accepted barring extraordinary circumstances.
As a venue for civil public discourse, the Opinion Desk has a responsibility to foster connection among community members in a way that is distinct from the perks offered by social media platforms, such as the ability to remain anonymous or advertise for an organization.
Any decision to grant anonymity will not be taken lightly and will be accompanied by a public explanation.
2. Signatories
In the past, The Daily has published opinion articles listing as many as 922 authors. Going forward, we will no longer publish pieces that act as petitions, instead only including the names of authors who meaningfully contributed to writing the article.
On a basic level, it is atypical for newspapers to act as platforms for mass petitions. The vast majority of individuals appearing below pieces with that many authors have likely only signed their name to a list and would not meet any reasonable criteria for authorship.
More practically, it is unfeasible for The Daily to verify that each one of hundreds of authors has actually agreed to be listed within the regular time frame for editing an op-ed. Given the tense political climate surrounding student speech, it is imperative that such a process occurs when a group of people would like to sign onto a piece. In the future, we will require verbal or written confirmation from each author that they agree to the contents of the op-ed before publishing.
Petitions like those which we have published in the past may still be circulated and reported on by our news desks. At the beginning of the month, we put this policy into action by reporting on a letter sent by a group of Jewish faculty to a congressional committee.
3. Publication criteria
In order to write an op-ed for The Daily, you must meet a series of basic criteria. First, you must be part of the Northwestern or Evanston community — students, faculty, staff, alumni and Evanston residents are all neatly included within this category.
The submission itself must also satisfy certain standards. It must be written in a decipherable and compelling manner. It must address an issue relevant to the Northwestern or Evanston community. Its factual basis must be grounded in reality. It must not engage in ad hominem personal attacks. It must not be hateful — submissions containing slurs or language that clearly aims to humiliate a group of people based on identity or immutable characteristics will be rejected.
The Daily also has an interest in platforming unpopular opinions in furtherance of ideological diversity within the opinion pages. We hope to foster informed discourse and allow readers to come to a better place of understanding with those with whom they stridently disagree.
Inevitably, these directives may come into conflict when the topic of an op-ed is politically charged and subject to widespread debate over whether a view should be considered hateful. In such situations, editors will be tasked with carefully weighing our obligations to each respective value given the context of the piece at hand.
4. Improving accuracy and inclusion
The Daily fact-checks opinion pieces using largely the same process as we use to fact-check news articles. Contributors are responsible for backing up each factual claim they make with accurate and reliable sourcing.
When editing responses to op-eds, editors will be required to read the original op-ed in full. They must ensure that the response does not misrepresent the original piece’s argument and that the two op-eds do not contain directly contradictory statements of fact. We acknowledge that we have erred in this area previously and are committed to a more rigorous opinion fact-checking process.
The Daily also acknowledges that it has published opinion pieces that included inaccuracies and language deviating from AP and Daily Style standards, and these errors have upset some in our community. We are committed to improving the standard of the pieces that we publish.
We have elevated the role of our Diversity & Inclusion Chairs to include editing stories consistently, including opinion pieces. Our D&I Chairs are consulting several stylebooks to update The Daily’s style guide, including but not limited to the AP Stylebook, the Asian American Journalists Association Style Guide and the Trans Journalists Association Stylebook and Coverage Guide. These editors have also compiled topical guides with input from community members to consult for opinion pieces and reported coverage.
While we acknowledge that these changes aren’t foolproof, we hope our improvements will allow us to flag more areas of concern in regards to inaccuracies and inconsistent style.
5. Letters to the Editor
In the past, The Daily has published a variety of articles under the banner of “Letters to the Editor.” In line with industry standards, we are now narrowing the scope of LTEs to only refer to responses to content published in The Daily. All opinion pieces that we no longer classify as LTEs may still be published as traditional op-eds.
This change is largely administrative, but we note it because we would like to strongly encourage readers to respond to The Daily’s content through LTEs. Our coverage should ideally be a starting point for larger dialogues surrounding the issues that most acutely affect our community. If you have any thoughts about a topic we covered, an op-ed we published or the strength of our reporting, please do not hesitate to send in a letter to the email listed below.
6. Removing old op-eds
The Daily will not remove published content from our website, barring extraordinary circumstances. Anyone considering contributing to the Opinion Desk should expect that the piece will live in perpetuity on the internet.
This piece represents the majority opinion of the Editorial Board of The Daily Northwestern. The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of all staff members or Editorial Board members of The Daily Northwestern. If you would like to respond publicly to this editorial, send a Letter to the Editor to [email protected].
