Editorial
Mark Hengel
Issue date: 9/30/05 Section: Editorial
Earlier this week, the 2004-05 edition of Hendrix College's yearbook, the Troubadour, was released. However, in place of smiling faces and laughter of remembering when, many students were distraught and disgusted at the quality and equity of the yearbook.
A yearbook is a tricky and time-consuming publication to produce. It requires a huge collection of pictures, writers to explain these pictures and events, layout designers, photographers and a tenacious editor to make sure everything comes together. It is tricky because balancing how many times individual students appear in the publication is a daunting task that first relies on a wide array of diverse pictures. And, come on, we all know the first thing we look for in a yearbook is how many times we appeared in the publication.
Regardless, there is no excuse for what students discovered in the newly-released annual, ironically labeled "In the Details." Yes, there are pictures of the same group of friends on many of its pages and yes, there were several major mistakes including the absence of entire living units from the residential life section and major events such as Ghost Roast and Winter Formal just to name a few. However, many students' reactions have been disappointing and immature.
Yes, you can call the former editor names and yes, you can hang up flyers demeaning her and publishing her e-mail address, but where does this get us? How is this constructive and how will these measures prevent this very unfortunate incident from happening again? It won't. The Profile sees a blatant error in the yearbook's protocol and agrees it should be reexamined by those elected to handle such situations-the Student Senate. However, the Profile also demands that students step up as well.
Some suggest that all printed publications should be reviewed before publication. First, it's impossible to do this without a set of formal expectations for each media outlet that now is absent and must be created. But, students must be careful not to begin to review and then censor what these publications produce for this begins to creep into the freedom of the press. It is also a time-consuming task for publications such as the Profile that publish every two weeks. As well, a bulk of the yearbook is completed after classes end...will the review process still be in place when students scatter from campus and head to their summer destinations? It seems absurd to picture next year's Media Committee staying after finals and counting the number of times that each student appears in the yearbook in the quest for equity. Formal and broad expectations should be laid out for all media entities as a guide to the leaders of these entities, but a review process is stepping over the line and is a knee-jerk reaction to a rare occurrence.
Secondly, the student body must also step up and help prevent this problem from happening again. Most yearbook editors complain about a lack of section editors, a lack of photographers, and/or a lack of pictures. This year, the Troubadour office should flooded with pictures cataloguing the adventures and fun times of students all over campus. More students should also try to involve themselves not just in the yearbook but in all media because the more diverse the staff the more diverse the coverage.
We, the student body, have a tendency to moan and groan about various campus issues and then never act. But, this is an easy time to step up and ensure the yearbook has a mass of diverse pictures that truly represent the "details" of the home we call Hendrix.
A yearbook is a tricky and time-consuming publication to produce. It requires a huge collection of pictures, writers to explain these pictures and events, layout designers, photographers and a tenacious editor to make sure everything comes together. It is tricky because balancing how many times individual students appear in the publication is a daunting task that first relies on a wide array of diverse pictures. And, come on, we all know the first thing we look for in a yearbook is how many times we appeared in the publication.
Regardless, there is no excuse for what students discovered in the newly-released annual, ironically labeled "In the Details." Yes, there are pictures of the same group of friends on many of its pages and yes, there were several major mistakes including the absence of entire living units from the residential life section and major events such as Ghost Roast and Winter Formal just to name a few. However, many students' reactions have been disappointing and immature.
Yes, you can call the former editor names and yes, you can hang up flyers demeaning her and publishing her e-mail address, but where does this get us? How is this constructive and how will these measures prevent this very unfortunate incident from happening again? It won't. The Profile sees a blatant error in the yearbook's protocol and agrees it should be reexamined by those elected to handle such situations-the Student Senate. However, the Profile also demands that students step up as well.
Some suggest that all printed publications should be reviewed before publication. First, it's impossible to do this without a set of formal expectations for each media outlet that now is absent and must be created. But, students must be careful not to begin to review and then censor what these publications produce for this begins to creep into the freedom of the press. It is also a time-consuming task for publications such as the Profile that publish every two weeks. As well, a bulk of the yearbook is completed after classes end...will the review process still be in place when students scatter from campus and head to their summer destinations? It seems absurd to picture next year's Media Committee staying after finals and counting the number of times that each student appears in the yearbook in the quest for equity. Formal and broad expectations should be laid out for all media entities as a guide to the leaders of these entities, but a review process is stepping over the line and is a knee-jerk reaction to a rare occurrence.
Secondly, the student body must also step up and help prevent this problem from happening again. Most yearbook editors complain about a lack of section editors, a lack of photographers, and/or a lack of pictures. This year, the Troubadour office should flooded with pictures cataloguing the adventures and fun times of students all over campus. More students should also try to involve themselves not just in the yearbook but in all media because the more diverse the staff the more diverse the coverage.
We, the student body, have a tendency to moan and groan about various campus issues and then never act. But, this is an easy time to step up and ensure the yearbook has a mass of diverse pictures that truly represent the "details" of the home we call Hendrix.