PressEthic

There was something strange about the last week's coverage of the student protests at Gallaudet University, the nation's first facility of higher education for the deaf and hard of hearing. The institution has been mired in controversy over the choice of the new incoming president, Jane Fernandes. Students protesting her appointment have blocked entrances to the campus, and 133 people were arrested. Homecoming was cancelled, and the faculty and the National Association of the Deaf are calling for her resignation, as trustees and administrators reiterate their support for her selection.

There has been plenty of coverage of the conflict, even internationally. But in a roundup of articles, there is a glaring omission from the stories published about the issue. Since the news first broke, it has unclear through many news sources why exactly Fernandes's appointment was so hotly contested. Lines like this were buried halfway through a Washington Post story:

Her critics say Fernandes is a divisive administrator, insensitive to the community the university serves.

Or there's this, from the Guardian:

Those opposed to presidency of Fernandes, formerly Gallaudet's provost, say that she isn't open to different points of view and that the selection process did not reflect the student body's diversity.

What does this mean? Why is it written so vaguely? Are the dramatic arrests and late night no-confidence votes really more important than the very reason this is happening? If this is why the protests are happening, there is some basic journalistic research that should be done to give readers a proper context of what is going on. What exactly is meant by "the student body's diversity" and who specifically makes up the student population? Are their any major divisive moments in her history as the university's provost? What different points of view are being brought up and ignored, and by whom? How was she even selected?

Once again, it seems, the sensationalistic aspect of a story has overshadowed what's really important, and journalists have failed to provide a context. Anyone looking to understand the why of the whole story would have to read through quite a few articles to piece it together.