Part 3 of 4: The Response to the Envoy’s Response
Jesse Lent’s comments are in bold.
Date: Sat Oct 16 08:41:13 EDT 2010
From: Gregg Morris
Subject: Re: Attention Envoy Editor-in-Chief Ming Fearon (Short Version)
To: “Jesse Lent, Envoy News”
<<<I am the one who made the mistake and not Ming.
<<
Ming Feargon’s comments about me were cheap shots even if I hadn’t responded and even if there wasn’t a mistake on your part. That kind of vainglorious attitude can be very problematic, especially for an irresponsible journalist, student or otherwise.
<<As a journalist, you know there is very little one can <<do in this situation.As a journalist and professor I know that a lot could be done. And it’s not a good sign that you, an editor, and your peers don’t know that.
<<We are not The New York Times, nor do we have any <<delusions of being a professional paper. If it is
<<possible to move beyond this, I would implore you to
<<please bring problems with the publication to
<<our attention directly.I don’t have “problems” with the Envoy. It is what it is. So, don’t expect any communiqués, public or private, from me. I do have issues with cheap shots, however. Regarding the E’s so-called problems with the College Administration, that’s a matter for the E and its readers. It has nothing to do with me (or the students in my classes). I was unimpressed with the logic and thinking of the Letter from the Editor as I was reading it. A rejoinder was the last thing on my mind … until, the 11th paragraph, that is.
I’ve attached a document I will be providing my students this coming week. Fearon and other E editors might benefit from reading from it. On the other hand, they might not.
Best,
G Morris
Part 5: Wrapping up.
Tags: college news media, CUNY student news media, student news media