In the current age, freedom of information access remains a large question for the common citizen. The ability to educate oneself with reported facts from a variety of sources is a hallmark of an open democracy. But should there be accountability when it comes to what should be disclosed and what shouldn’t?
One article published this week in The Cavalier Daily presents arguments for and against the censorship of information. This week, The Washington Post obtained a copy of a letter from the federal government, lambasting the for its handling of various sexual assault cases. This came after a lengthy investigation of the University by the Department of Education. It also resulted in a less severe copy of the official response after “weeks of feverish maneuvering behind the scenes” by state and federal legislators on behalf of the University. The Cavalier Daily reprocessed these findings, providing examples with several cases that “were removed in the summary and conclusion of the revised letter.”
This example shows how censoring information might work for better and for worse. Both The Washington Post and The Cavalier Daily have done what any journalistic outlet should do: expose and distribute private information that the public would want to know. A topic as controversial as sexual assault at the University imperatively requires caution with the open disclosure of data. The Cavalier Daily, following in the footsteps of The Washington Post, chose to report neutrally, only on factual evidence: that two letters had been sent, the latter generalizing what the former covered. Access to both, in this case, is a solid example of eliminating the censorship of information, clarifying further the University’s actions on a relevant problem.
But let’s play devil’s advocate for a moment. Though extra transparency on such a contentious issue seems right, what exactly are the motivations behind accessing such information? In other words, why would The Washington Post want to exercise its rights to see the private letters, and why would The Cavalier Daily want to republish its findings? Is such an article meant to elucidate the larger sexual assault problem at U.S. universities, or is it meant to chide the University for trying to whitewash statistics and details about its own cases?
It depends — and after all, who really knows the motivations? Of course, The Washington Post is a national news outlet that can and should cover significant topics like sexual assault. But should The Cavalier Daily take such initiatives as well — to fight for information that will benefit its readers? It’s difficult to answer, but it perhaps depends on what information The Cavalier Daily thinks is best for its readership, especially with a pressing matter like sexual assault so prevalent at the University. Censoring negligible details unnecessary to the reportable facts is one thing. Censoring the subject outright is another.
The Cavalier Daily, then, operates precariously in-between both points, having to choose what is suitable for readers to know, and what isn’t. In this sense, avoiding censorship is somewhat impossible. There will always be something unreported and something left unsaid. But we shouldn’t be quick to blame our publications for such omissions. In an age awash with so much information, there’s always something left to learn. Our news outlets can provide what they will, but it’s up to us to freely find and complete what’s missing.
Sasan Mousavi is the Public Editor for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at publiceditor@cavalierdaily.com or on Twitter at @CDPublicEditor.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: The truth about nuclear power in Northern Virginia
By Paul Kurtzweil | 11 hours agoYoungkin is trying to entice data centers to move to Northern Virginia for his own political gain, and presenting this to the taxpayer as a service to the citizen is deceiving.
CASTAGNO: One year later — a local zoning ordinance proves its worth
By Conall Costagno | 2 days agoIn its current situation, Charlottesville is an early adopter of the upzoning movement, giving the City the unique opportunity to act as a shining example of its benefits.
RASHID: Club exclusivity hurts the student body
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | 5 days agoWe need to reconsider how we think about extracurriculars — this hyper-competitive and exclusive culture which implicitly frames clubs as resume-padders must be stopped.
