Western pride
We weren't aware the Western Herald was supposed to pledge allegiance to Western Michigan University.
Yet the Herald, WMU's campus newspaper, has come under fire from the Western Student Association, which passed a resolution to ban newspaper advertisements from rival universities.
These complaints came after the paper ran several large ads for "competing" universities, such as Oakland University - the same sort of ads often in Central Michigan Life.
The resolution contends advertising for other universities undermines campus pride and could even draw away students.
Like most things pertaining to student government, the resolution has no binding effect, and amounts to little more than a formal suggestion. And the Herald, an independent entity from the university, can and should shrug off the WSA's silly request.
However, the resolution's impotence offers little respite from its most disconcerting feature - the gross misunderstanding that led students to propose something wholly counterintuitive to the newspaper's independence. WSA senator Tim Heacock, who wrote and presented the resolution, said, "We're supposed to be promoting Western and it's the university student paper," according to the Herald.
Within one sentence, the WSA's errors are perfectly clear.
The Herald is not supposed to be promoting Western. It owes WMU no loyalty; CM Life, similarly, is not meant to promote CMU.
The Herald is meant for scrutiny, not support. Informing readers often runs contrary to bolstering the university's reputation.
Consider more closely Heacock's call for "support" - what, if anything, does this entail? Does this require the newspaper never publish critical articles? Is this the end of university budget stories? These, after all, detract from Western's prestige.
It's doubtful Heacock means something this extreme. Perhaps his comments are meant to apply only to the business side of the newspaper divide - the advertising staff, which publishes things that clearly are promotional.
But what would comprise an undesirable ad? Aside from pornography, expletives and other exceptionally tasteless things, most ad space is determined by who is willing to buy it, and at what price. WMU could, theoretically, outbid every rival college.
If other colleges propose an appealing advertising rate, what good business sense could decline them? It would require explicit intent to "support" the university - but advertisements should support the publication, and declining a lucrative offer would conflict with that.
Allegiance to the university is either unethical journalism or imprudent business.
Pick your poison, Heacock.
