Nichols must explain her new expanded role better

TO THE EDITOR:

Eric Johnson told us Wednesday that editor Allison Nichols was defending ""higher journalistic standards"" in her regulation and oversight regarding the opinion content of the DTH.

Presumably it was these same journalistic standards which have now allowed her to redefine the structure of the Daily Tar Heel such that the former system in which the editor-in-chief was merely a nonvoting member of the Editorial Board no longer seems to apply.

I call on Allison Nichols to publicly define this ""new role"" she sees for the DTH which justifies what she does.

At the moment" all it seems is that the Opinion desk is being censured such that it may not in any way question how the editor envisions The Daily Tar Heel and that Ms. Nichols effectively can silence any opinion by attacking the quality of the writing.

What next?

A student body presidential candidate criticizes the direction of the DTH and the opinion may reach only one conclusion that of opposition to the candidate?

Eric Johnson's column was certainly enlightening but what seems more telling is the fact that such an article need come out under a named author; is the new editorial board sufficiently weakened that it may not itself criticise Nichols?

Nine months ago when campaigning for role of editor Nichols was quoted saying" ""One of the things I want to do is to start a public forum when something about the DTH coverage sparks controversy"".

Where is this forum? And what power do we have to challenge her?

 

Mark Laichena

UNC Student Abroad

Political Science