Letter to the editor

    I am writing in regard to the article "Speech gets high marks," which ran on the front page of the Tufts Daily on Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2009.  While coverage of President Obama's inaugural speech is certainly news that deserves a front-page slot, the tone of the article rendered it fit for the Op-Ed section, rather than being presented as objective journalism.  The shoddy reporting that went into the article made it little more than a reflection of the author's own views on the speech.
    A quick Google search of "Obama inaugural speech review" reveals that the reaction to Obama's speech was not as unanimously sparkling as the Daily's article would lead one to believe.  While the expected criticisms were present in staunch conservative publications and on conservative Web sites such as National Review, the very liberal Huffington Post Web site posted that left-wing writer John Judis also criticized Obama's remarks in an article in The New Republic.  As well, Politico's Web site has an article posted, entitled "Obama's address draws mixed reviews," which details some criticisms of the speech by scholars.  Clearly, the reaction was less than 100 percent positive.
    A reading of the Daily's article, however, reveals no evidence of any dissenting opinion.  Part of this problem clearly comes from the sources that the author chose to quote.  A rundown of the list reveals that the only quotations come from a major Obama campaign advisor, the head of Obama's "New England fundraising effort," a Democratic strategist, two members of Tufts Students for Obama, and the president of the Tufts Democrats.  Such cherry-picking of sources does not make for an objective article; instead, it serves to confirm that the article was written not to report the facts, but to express an opinion.
    Newspapers contain an Op-Ed section for a reason.  It allows them to present the opinions of its readers and editors, while clearly delineating these opinions from the objective reporting of the news.  If The Tufts Daily wants to be considered a serious newspaper, it needs to do a far better job of separating the two.

Evan Chiacchiaro
Class of 2011