Talk:The South End/Talk 2004

NPOV
I've done some editing and moved the text below from the article to bring it closer to NPOV:
 * The quality of the issues of the issues fluctuates between near professional grade comparable to a suburban city newspaper at times, and high school paper amateurishness most of the time. Signs of these amateurishness include: scattered mispellings, inexplicable paragraph breaks, mislabeled jumps, incorrectly structured articles, pixelated photographs obviously taken from websites, pointless filler, and random, unreliable distribution. The website sometimes lags behind the print issues, with some print issues never making it online; the reverse also happens occasionally.

Hopefully the article won't be deleted now. BCorr | &#1041;&#1088;&#1072;&#1081;&#1077;&#1085; 11:26, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * As a wsu student, I can tell you that alot of what that paragraph you cut says is tru. "scattered mispellings," well, I can't talk. "inexplicable paragraph breaks," happen alot in the inner pages, like the article wasn't long enough so they just put in random breaks to make it fit. "mislabeled jumps, incorrectly structured articles," that's going into journalism jargon, so I can't talk their ether. "pixelated photographs obviously taken from websites," tru that. "random, unreliable distribution." very tru that, they have the stands for it all over campus, but its like the delivery people toss a coin and go like, today we'll deliver to the student center but not to science hall. I almost get the feeling they don't want me to read there paper. 141.217.173.178 22:13, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * As another WSU student, I can also tell you that the bad distribution is a fact, not a POV. Someone told me the other day that they did an article on Eminem in last Monday's issue. I never saw that issue in print, though it is on the website. The other items listed, such as bad spelling, are also facts. But I would at least like the opportunity to criticize those things on a regular basis. Robert Happelberg 20:51, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Feitclub's revert of "Mr. Treason"'s edits
User:Feitclub reverted some of the edits made by a non-logged on user. Some of the items stated are biased, but some are true. As a graduate who tried to keep up with his old alma mater, (I try to read The South End every chance I get) I can offer some help in sifting.


 * As of the of fall 2004, the website (www.southend.wayne.edu) is updated the night before the print issue hits stands. It's a result of new editor-in-chief Joseph J. Wilson's plan to return the paper to it's former glory. When Wilson took over in May 2004, he replaced the entire editorial staff. The influx of new editors, including noted student journalists Martha Wood and Larissa Barlow, has increased circulation and respect for the daily newspaper. It is now far more balanced then it has ever been under any editors.

From what I understand, the staff of the paper gets replaced when students graduate, and the editors often are seniors. Martha Wood and Larissa Barlow may be "noted journalists," but only locally. The claim of balance is a POV.


 * Controversy still follows the paper, however, when in the first week of printing in the fall, it ran a sex issue, a breaking news story about an assault on Wayne State's campus and an article that exposed incompetence in the student council after they wasted student's money.

The sex issue (Sept. 13) may have upset some old school officials, but students seemed lukewarm about it. The breaking story about an assault was Sept. 14 or 15, if I remember correctly. The story about a botched event sponsored by the student council ran Sept. 16.


 * The paper, as a result, has gained a lot of attention from the school's administration, and much more respect from it's readers.

More respect from its readers? Sounds like a POV to me. Robert Happelberg 15:07, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * sure, the paper has improved cosmeticly. the big fullpage MPAA psa against movie piracy the last couple weeks has probly helped.