Emerson College’s student newspaper since 1947 • berkeleybeacon.com
Thursday, Sept. 10, 2020 • Volume xx, Issue xx
COVID dashboard now updated daily
@berkeleybeacon // @beaconupdate
WE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY Beacon sees 17 formal resignations Diti Kohli
Editor-in-Chief
Diti Kohli
Beacon Staff In a shift from prior announcements, Emerson administrators vowed Tuesday to begin updating the college’s COVID-19 dashboard daily after more than a month of less frequent updates. The decision marks a swift reversal for college officials, who originally said information about the numbers of tests administered, the quantity of positive tests, and positivity rates would be communicated only once a week. Almost three weeks after community members began undergoing testing on Aug. 6, Emerson upped communication on testing numbers to twice a week on
Mondays and Thursdays. The choice to increase updates was made “in an effort to provide the community with real-time information,” Assistant Vice President for Campus Life and “COVID Lead” Erik Muurisepp said in an email. Administrators’ decision to update the dashboard daily falls in line with the actions of several other local institutions that have reopened for in-person or hybrid classes. Boston University, Northeastern University, and Suffolk University, for example, release these numbers every day on their respective dashboards. Muurisepp told The Beacon the dashboard may not necessarily update every day because the Broad
Institute takes 24 to 48 hours to process the tests, and no tests are administered at Tufts Medical Center on the weekend. The Broad picks up the tubes from the facility two times a day, he confirmed. As of publication, the dashboard showed three positive tests for the week of Aug. 31 to Sept. 6., and 10 positive tests total since Aug. 6. More than 9,500 tests have been administered so far at Tufts Medical Center. On Wednesday, one student had been isolated on campus after being “known or reasonably known to be infected,” per the dashboard. Thirteen students remain in quarantine Tests, Pg. 3
A journalist’s commitment is to truth, to fairness, to balance. And this is The Beacon’s truth. We, as an institution with a longstanding history at Emerson, have repeatedly produced content and enabled a newsroom culture that has ostracized the marginalized communities we vow to give a voice to. We have devalued and silenced community members with good intentions to make our paper produce better journalism. And we have passively watched while days, weeks, and years have passed where we could have made The Beacon a more accepting and inviting organization. This week, our staff had enough. If you too believe that print isn’t dead, you may have realized our physical paper is four pages—instead of eight—this week. That’s because The Beacon is operating on a bare-bones staff, who are working diligently to provide essential coverage about the pandemic, the college’s reopening, and Title IX policy. But a majority of our writers, columnists, photographers, and editors have not contributed recently. In fact, many may not have a byline in The Beacon for quite some time, or ever again. Almost 20 staff members have effectively sent their resignations, and many are mulling over leaves of absence until structural improvements are made to Emerson’s only newspaper. They want change, and they deserve it. To the outside viewer, it may seem like the organization’s unrest is the direct result of a story published last week that centered around a white student, her support for Black Lives Matter, and the consequent loss of her tuition. That article is admittedly rife with flaws and has since been removed from The Beacon’s primary distribution platforms with a note from the editor. Still, the problem with The Beacon is far-reaching and goes well beyond a singular decision to press “publish” when we shouldn’t have. We are a primarily white organization that has held up journalistic values rooted in inequity. Those who belong to marginalized communities and pass through our ranks have often felt unheard by editor after editor. They speak up—and too often, they get shut down. And while I, as Editor-in-Chief, tried to better this environment when my tenure began, I fell short. I take responsibility for hurting the staff members—and anyone Note, Pg. 4
ELA shifts online Students disillusioned after LA program shifts due to pandemic Security guard Louodie Casimir watches students file into Piano Row from behind plexiglass. Tomas Gonzalez / Beacon Staff
Everything you need to know about the updated Title IX policy Diti Kohli, Katie Redefer, & Stephanie Purifoy Beacon Staff
A college committee of administrators, faculty, and students released an updated Title IX policy establishing the college’s altered process for handling allegations of sexual misconduct and violence, in response to a new federal mandate from the U.S. Department of Education. Dubbed the “Power-Based Interpersonal Violence (PBIV) Policy,” the revamped Emerson regulations include significant differences from its predecessor, the Sexual Misconduct guidelines, which were in place since the 2014–2015 academic year. The 81-page PBIV policy dictates that some cases of misconduct will be processed under Emerson’s procedure, and others will be dealt with through a new, federally-mandated process that
includes live hearings. In addition, the updated college guidelines add stringent timelines to the reporting, responding, and appeals processes, and clarifies existing measures, like informal resolutions and administrative leave. The set of federal guidelines went into effect on Aug. 14, the day Emerson debuted its updated policy in a college-wide email. Below is a breakdown, factchecked by a member of the committee, of all of the document’s relevant protocols and changes from previous policy. So what’s actually changed? The most striking difference between the updated Emerson policy and its predecessor is the distinction between conduct prohibited by the college and conduct prohibited under the federal guidelines. Whether the reported behaviors falls under the purview of the Emerson policy, the
federal policy, or both determines how the case is assigned, investigated, and when applicable, properly disciplined. Cases of reported conduct that include behavior barred by both policies are subject to the federal investigation and sanctions process, which comes with a live hearing. DeVos’ regulations prohibit just a narrow subset of what the college deems unacceptable. That means all conduct forbidden under the federal Title IX regulations is prohibited by the college, but not everything deemed inappropriate under Emerson policy is punishable by DeVos’ standards. In short, the federal policy forbids sexual assault, dating/domestic violence, sex-based stalking, the solicitation of sexual acts in exchange for goods and services, and sexual harrasement that is so severe it denies a community member Title IX, Pg. 2
Diti Kohli, Katie Redefer, & Domenic Conte Beacon Staff
Pasadena native Max Tedford felt enamored by the ELA campus as a high school senior. He loved the futuristic-looking building, set in the middle of a beloved city he visited regularly in his youth. In fact, he said the Los Angeles program was more than 50 percent of the reason he decided to attend Emerson in the first place. “That’s an amazing campus,” he said in a phone interview with The Beacon from his hometown. “And living in downtown L.A. is a dream. That’s not something you can usually afford unless you want to make sacrifices in terms of cleanliness, space, or cost.” But last Friday, the quintessential ELA experience Tedford fantasized about—and meticulously planned— for three years quickly disappeared from his grasp. Emerson announced the ELA pro-
gram will take place entirely online this fall in light of new COVID-19 guidance from Los Angeles County officials. Chief Operations Officer of the L.A. campus Timothy Chang said the college came to the decision after the county’s Department of Public Health notified colleges and universities they would not be able to open campuses until November. “I think they just felt the pressure to set a date because everybody was asking,” Chang said. A number of institutions that neighbor the ELA campus, like the University of Southern California, Loyola Marymount University, and the California Institute of Technology, must also remain closed. L.A. County currently has a “widespread” risk level for coronavirus, according to state data. The positivity rate for tests sits around four percent as of Aug. 29. The ELA program usually accommodates around 200 senior students in their final undergraduate semesters ELA, Pg. 3
INSIDE THIS EDITION Everything we miss about how the Max used to be Pg. 4 POWER responds to last week’s Gina Martin article Pg. 4
The ELA campus. Beacon Archive
News
The Berkeley Beacon
September 10, 2020
2
What you need to know about Title IX
“equal access” to educational opportunities. Emerson’s extended list of inappropriate conduct includes all stalking, relationship violence, and sexual harassment that does not fall under the DeVos guidelines. It also prohibits sexual exploitation; intimidation; alcohol and drugs; lack of bystander intervention; retaliation for reporting alleged abusive conduct; and sexual contact with someone who is in any way “incapacitated,” like inebriated or unconscious. Devos’ Title IX policy also requires the college to respond only to conduct violations that take place in areas where they have “substantial control,” like classroom buildings, residence halls, and on-campus event spaces. This precludes schools and universities from acting on claims that happen off-campus or at a study abroad program. For example, under the federal Title IX regulations, Emerson would be mandated to respond to a report where a student was stalked between Walker Building and Piano Row. But if that same student was followed or intimidated solely in Downtown Crossing, at the AMC Theater, or in the Boston Common, the college is not obligated to lead an investigation under the federal guidelines. However, the steering committee made it clear in the new policy that the college will continue to respond to all claims involving college community members, regardless of where they take place. In the college policy’s own words, “although the Dept. of Education has more detailed & narrow definitions of different forms of PBIV, the college will enforce [the] Title IX policy based on their own definitions.” The federal policy also tends to be broader in wording and application than the college’s guidelines. This is most apparent in the two documents’ differing definitions of sexual harassment. Emerson’s section on prohibited sexual harassment consists of a 13-point list, which describes in great detail its different forms, like sexual inneundos, name-calling, physical coercion, and failure to treat people consistently with their gender identity. The federal definition, on the other hand, is four sentences long. The process of investigating and sanctioning cases also varies between the college and the federal policy. If a formally-filed case falls under the jurisdiction of Emerson’s PBIV policy, and not the federal guidelines, little changes in terms of how the report is handled, in comparison to what the process was before the Aug. 14 update. The report is “thoroughly and impartially” investigated either by deputy Title IX coordinator Ryan Milligan, or an outside investigator appointed by Title IX coordinator Pamela White. The investigative process includes taking statements, sifting through evidence, and interviewing witnesses privately. Then the investigator writes a draft investigation report that each party and the Title IX coordinator will review and provide feedback on in writing. From there, the Title IX coordinator dives into an internal review, during which they would make a “determination of responsibility,” or
more simply, a decision. Then a final investigation report is completed. If the Title IX coordinator finds a community member responsible for violating the PBIV policy based on the final investigation report, they would notify the Director of Community Standards to assemble a sanctions panel that would give a ruling on disciplinary measures. Reports of conduct that fall under the federal Title IX regulations, however, are now subject to a new step: a courtroom-like live hearing. This means investigations that explore behaviors prohibited by the DeVos regulations are now subject to a cross-questioning process that includes both parties—an addition denounced by many who believe these hearings may discourage survivors from coming forward. In this procedure, the burden of finding a responding party “responsible” or “not responsible” of the accused conduct is also shifted away from the Title IX coordinator. Instead, this obligation falls to a “Decision Maker,” who can be anyone but the college coordinator or the case investigator. The live-hearing questioning would always take place remotely after a final investigation report has been written and shared. During this questioning, the character of either party is not to be a point of discussion, nor will the reporting party’s sexual predisposition or background be considered in the final decision, according to language in the college policy. There, a “Decision Maker” would moderate and oversee the hearing where each party’s advisor would be able to cross-examine the other party and witnesses. Advisors are chosen by the parties themselves and may be attorneys, though there is no requirement that an advisor have legal experience. If a party does not have an advisor, the college will provide one. Administrators are already in the process of hiring outside litigators to fill the need for advisors, a steering committee member told The Beacon. Before the redrafting process, advisors for each party were largely there for support, provided to help parties endure the potentially traumatic and emotional parts of the Title IX process. Now, they take on a more important and immersive role where they are the ones responsible for forwarding the parties’ case through questioning. The Title IX office also intends to hire a list of Decision Makers from outside the college they may regularly use. The federal policy did not provide guidelines on how to hire a Decision Maker and what their background should be, other than the role cannot be filled by the Title IX Coordinator or investigator. In the end, these Decision Makers will be in charge of making the final determination on a community member’s behavior, rather than the Title IX coordinator as the Emerson-specific policy mandates. The Decision Maker will also make a recommendation of disciplinary measures to the sanctions panel. Then, the report goes to the Community Standards office, where a sanctions panel is assembled. Cases that fall only under college-prohibited conduct will not be subject to any kind of live hearing.
Any reported cases that include conduct violations that fall under both the Emerson policy and the federal guidelines are called “hybrid reports,” and are handled the same way as cases under the DeVos regulations. As a result, the process for hybrid reports includes a live hearing. For example, a domestic violence case that includes conduct violations both on campus and off campus would be a hybrid report. Therefore, a formal report about that relationship would include the live hearing process and cross-examination of evidence. Because conduct reports often include violations that are ongoing and involve various offenses in differing locations, hybrid reports may become commonplace with the new policy in effect. This investigative process has also undergone two smaller changes. One, the case investigator now takes on more of a fact-finder and presenter role. Before the redrafting, this investigator would include a recommendation in the final report on whether or not they believe the responding party is in violation of the college’s conduct standards. Now, this portion has been eliminated. Any recommendations, as well as the final finding of responsibility, will come solely from the Title IX coordinator. Two, the implementation of “supportive measures” has also been tweaked. The Title IX coordinator may still implement these measures—which include actions like a no-contact order or push to remove two parties from the same class—at any time during the investigation. But under the new federal policy, these supportive measures cannot put an undue burden, or have a “substantial impact,” on the responding party. If the responding party feels the orders are unfair, they may urge the coordinator to reconsider the action on the basis that it hinders their educational experience. Lastly, the appeals process, where either of the parties can ask for a reconsideration of the final sanctions, has remained largely the same. The only major change is a switch in the identity of the appellate officer, who leads this process. Before, the college’s Dean of Campus Life would oversee appeals in the undergraduate
population, and the graduate dean would oversee those involving graduate students. Now, these two roles have switched. So the graduate dean will now handle the appeals process for a case involving a first- or second-year. This role reversal was made so that the deans’ role as appellate officers do not interfere with their part in other steps of the investigative process, like implementing supportive measures, a steering committee member said. What parts of the policy are more detailed now than before? Over the course of the summer, the steering committee took advantage of the policy redraft to dive into underdeveloped areas of the college’s guidelines. A number of these de facto topics already existed in the old Sexual Misconduct policy, but the formal revision process allowed the college to affirm important measures with new, necessary details. For one, the updated PBIV policy delves into the informal resolution process, which is applicable in cases involving violations under the college-specific and federal policy. This allows the involved parties to forgo the investigative process and a potential live hearing for more lenient measures mutually agreed upon by the two parties and the Title IX coordinator. In an email, Sylvia Spears, head of the Social Justice Center, said three informal processes “have always been available, but weren’t specifically addressed in the policy.” The Title IX coordinator may implement supportive measures that can “resolve the matter,” or moderate a “facilitated conversation…typically before or instead of” the formal process. The responding party can also accept responsibility and disciplinary actions for the alleged behavior in lieu of a formal investigation. Either party may request an informal resolution process any time before an investigator decides whether or not the responding party is responsible for the alleged conduct. The new Emerson policy also includes additional details on the process of implementing administrative leave for student employees, staff, or faculty involved in a Title
IX case. The new language clarifies that student workers, like tap desk assistants or registrar employees, can be temporarily removed from their position or assigned to work in a different space. Faculty and staff may be put on leave—with or without pay—at any time during the process. Steering committee members made sure to explicitly detail the ins and outs of informal resolution and administrative leave, because the new federal guidelines require more detailed language for any “supplementary measures” that may be enacted before or during the investigation, a committee member confirmed. The new language places a greater burden of responsibility on the organizations and groups to hold its members responsible for potential PBIV violations. Now, “a recognized student group or organization may be held accountable for the behavior of its members and guests on its premises, at or arising out of events sponsored (or co-sponsored) by the organization, or when a group including a significant number of members or guests violates this Policy.” The policy goes so far to say violation could result in probation, loss of college-recognized organization status, or even dissolution. The updated PBIV policy also set forth some guidelines for student organizations about how they would go about reporting instances of misconduct, as well as information about training their members about harassment prevention. The previous sexual misconduct policy featured an almost complete lack of guidelines for organizations about their role in the Title IX process. However, the new policy does not clarify whether or not student organizations have the right to remove members from their organization based on ongoing or past Title IX investigations or accusations. While there were no new disciplinary actions added to the policy, it does further detail the range of sanctions that could apply to community members found responsible for violating PBIV measures and a basic glossary of relevant Title IX language.
contact@berkeleybeacon.com
The Berkeley Beacon
September 10, 2020
3
Campus life reimagined under new social distancing measures. Tomas Gonzalez / Beacon Staff
Ten positive tests reported Cont. from pg. 1 due to possible exposure to the virus. Those isolated or quarantined off-campus do not appear on the dashboard. The dashboard incorrectly displayed testing numbers for the week of Aug. 31 to Sept. 6 for at least one night. Muurisepp said the page had instead showed last week’s numbers—around 4,300 tests and five positive tests. He also said that administrators have removed certain categories because the configuration of the webpage is an “iterative process.” For one, the dashboard no longer includes the number of hospitalizations in the college community—as it did before. “Our aim was to provide as complete a picture of the virus’s impact on the community as possible, but
we have come to realize that, unlike universities with affiliated medical centers, we have no way to track those numbers with 100 percent certainty,” Muurisepp wrote in an email. “As full transparency and accuracy are our ultimate goal in presenting the dashboard, we felt it best to leave hospitalizations off.” That’s the second marker to be removed from the dashboard recently, since the college took off the number of invalid tests last week. Invalid results indicate user error and require the community member to be re-tested. Muurisepp said Emerson’s invalid test rate sits at 1.9 percent. Unlike multiple other colleges, Emerson’s dashboard does not include a breakdown of positive tests among students, staff, and faculty. diti_kohli@emerson.edu
As ELA opts to go online, students adapt to change Cont. from pg. 1 All typically live within the one Emerson building, while attending one to two final classes and completing an internship. This year, however, students are barred from entering the facility downtown. Most plan to Zoom into remote classes from desks at off-campus apartments or breakfast nooks in their childhood homes. Tedford said a large chunk of the program attendees—up to 30 or 40 people—dropped or deferred from the program. Chang estimated that number is as high as 50. “It’s pretty disappointing,” Tedford explained. Several students expressed disappointment about what they called spotty and delayed communication from administrators about the program’s plans before last week. Maysoon Khan, an ELA resident assistant, said she wishes administrators were more transparent with students about the plans but said she understands it’s hard to do so when circumstances are unpredictable. “We’re living in an unsure time… and like I feel this is a product of that,” Khan said. “I wish there was more transparency. But there’s nothing I can do. It’s just a hard decision to make.” Senior writing, literature and publishing major Jennifer Petrilli said she decided to drop the ELA program only a week before she was expected to move in due to a lack of information she was receiving. “There was little to no correspondence on anything,” Petrelli said from her Norton home. “We were all just trying to figure out what was going on. If they still expected us to
come out, when we were supposed to come out? And there was just a lot of nothing. My mom had to call them and be like ‘What is the deal, are you expecting them to come out at some point?’” Journalism major Alessandra Guarneri said one of the most disappointing parts about the cancellation is how it stops her from entering the
“We’re living in an unsure time...and I feel this is a product of that.” - Maysoon Khan L.A. facility. A New Jersey native, Guarneri has never stepped foot in the building she has dreamed of studying in for years. She wishes she could visit the patio or at least lounge in the campus lobby. “If the air conditioning is on and people are in the building, I don’t understand why we can’t go in,” she said. “Not opening it in any capacity is ridiculous.”
Only a small subsect of the ELA staff and three resident assistants who live on-campus are allowed into the building for now. Five RAs were originally hired for the semester. The remaining resident assistants may continue living on-campus until the semester ends, Chang said. “We’re not going to make them move out unless they want to move out,” he said. “They’re isolated on their own anyway. So they’re probably in one of the safest living environments they could be in, because there’s only three of them.” For some students, off-campus housing is the silver lining in an otherwise odd semester. Guarneri opted to sign a lease with a friend also attending ELA when the fate of next few months was still uncertain. She knew moving off campus would ensure she stayed in L.A. if classes shifted online at any point. “Typically, getting out of an Emerson housing agreement is very difficult,” Guarneri, a journalism major, said. “But with the pandemic, they’ve been more lenient and understanding.” Fellow senior Mica Kendall opted to move into a long-term AirBnb in L.A. because the city location is essential to her thesis project. She said that ELA as a whole played a major role in her decision to attend Emerson, and she has been dreaming of interviewing L.A. based musicians and bands for her thesis since her first year. “For me, I wanted to be in L.A. because of my backpack journalism senior thesis,” Kendall said. “That’s part of the reason I’m still here, to photograph and to actually interview people, because I don’t think I can
Tedford attended Emerson partly because of ELA. Courtesy of Max Tedford make an efficient thesis from my house in Texas.” Some students are still in a precarious situation with their internship prospects. ELA students are required to maintain an internship throughout their study at the campus, and although some students aren’t finding internships as easily as they have in the past, Chang said the team working with students is not known to fail in helping students secure one. “We have a robust academic services team that is working on students on getting their internships, and if they talk with them early, and often…they’ve always received internships in the past,” Chang said. “COVID, while its a complication, I
don’t think it’s a barrier for students getting an internship.” Chang said the hope is to open campus in the spring, and that overall developments in the handling of the pandemic will help them reach a point where they can safely return. “Hopefully by [the spring] we’ll have better testing, maybe, cross our fingers, we’ll have a vaccine, maybe we’ll have a better understanding of treatment options,” Chang said. “There’s a whole bunch of different factors that could allow us to open up sooner rather than later for the spring.”
contact@berkeleybeacon.com
Opinion
The Berkeley Beacon
September 10, 2020
4
My love letter to The Max that is no more Robby Gessel Obviously, a lot has changed on campus because of the pandemic. But what bothers me the most is not the online classes, nor is it the frequent testing, social distancing, or mask-wearing. What I miss most is The Max. “But The Max is still open!” you may say. “You can still get the same foods at the grill—chicken tenders, burgers, curly fries. They even added quesadillas. Quesadillas! The C-store is open too. You can still buy peanut M&Ms and ice cream!” Yes, I know. I am aware The Max is open. I know I can still buy a pint of ice cream to eat in a single sitting. I know I can order chicken tenders and curly fries. But I didn’t just go for the food. I went to The Max for the experience. The Max Mutchnick Campus Center, more commonly known as “The Max,” used to be, as the name suggests, a center for campus life. Whenever I went to The Max, be it for the midnight ice cream runs, the quick lunches, or the casual dinners, I always ran into familiar faces. I could sit at The Max for hours and see friends walk in at regular intervals. I enjoyed just sitting there and chatting in line or in the seating area with people I knew. I know not everyone feels the same way about The Max. For others, perhaps, it is simply a place with average food and interactions with people you are trying to avoid. But for me, every person I ran into made my day just a little bit better. But now, The Max feels a lot emptier. I first noticed the emptiness when I showed up at 10 p.m. one
night and not a single other student was there. In previous semesters, The Max would be buzzing with activity at that time of night, but it was silent. I miss the little things about The Max. Seeing someone in line for the grill and saying the obligatory “Oh, hey.” Sitting at the tables and giving those you know a subtle nod and hand wave. Saying hi to someone as they walk in and again as they come out with their food. Running into that friend who you just never see outside of The Max, saying “We should totally hang out more,” and then not seeing them again until you run into them at The Max again a week later. Going anywhere as a large group is discouraged, especially a confined space, like The Max. And even when I go to The Max now, I don’t stay for a long time like I used to. I no longer linger by the grill, so I can make space for others. I don’t sit for hours at the tables, because it just feels more sanitary to eat in my room or outside. The Max staff is still friendly, and I do still run into people occasionally. But the run-ins are far and few between each visit. Maybe I’m just going at the wrong time. Still, at the old Max, there was no “wrong time.” I practically always found people I knew. I have extensively thought upon the reason for the new state of The Max. The obvious reason is that it’s yet another casualty of the pandemic. Fewer people are allowed in the space due to COVID safety restrictions, and there are fewer students living on campus. However, I theorize there is a deeper change go-
ing on. This semester, Emerson partnered with several dining establishments near campus that accept board bucks—restaurants that provide new alternatives to what is offered at the Max. In addition, the dining hall has transitioned to take out only. The DH offers more options than The Max at around the same speed. So between that and the new options, The Max’s niche as the fast option on campus is virtually gone. Perhaps after the frequent trips to Tatte drain students’ board bucks, they will flock back to The Max, but maybe not. The hard truth is that as long as necessary social distancing restrictions are in place, The Max can never be the hub it once was. That’s alright with me, because there are other options available that replace both the food and social aspect. My friends and I have begun taking our suppers and other such meals to the Boston Common, or as we have dubbed it, the “New Max.” Whenever I go to the Common, I almost always see people I know, and it’s a great place to hang out with friends and grab meals at a safe distance. While I do miss the constant stream of people running through the old Max, the New Max is a space where I can enjoy good friends, good food, and the same sense of community that made The Max so special. Robby Gessel is a marketing communication major from the class of 2022. If you would like to respond to this thought piece in the form of a letter to the editor, email Letters@ BerkeleyBeacon.com. Letters may be edited for style and clarity. contact@berkeleybeacon.com
A Note from The Editor else—who were upset by coverage and conversations that happened under my watch. And I apologize for the ways the paper has blundered in recent years, like last semester when The Beacon published a COVID-centric article with a masked Asian student in the photo at the start of the pandemic; when we released an editorial that belittled multicultural organizations’ efforts for justice and equity; and when we wrote a story, and an editorial to match, that was steeped in ableist language. This list goes on. After hours of conversation with staff members this week, The Beacon is doing something that we should have done a long time ago. The paper is entirely reassessing the way we report, produce, and operate. It is time for The Beacon to push back against the racist, sexist, and ableist tropes that have plagued mainstream newsrooms built by and for white men. A long list of
necessary changes is already being workshopped by our editors, our staff, and a growing advisory board of professors and journalists—many of whom are people of color. Among those improvements is an overhaul of our constitution, the addition of bias training, the creation of a consulting board, and a reinvention of our editor-in-chief election process. Once these amendments are fully workshopped with deadlines attached, they will be shared publicly on The Beacon website for the sake of accountability. Yet I admit, The Beacon can never achieve its goals for betterment without the trust of the communities we are supposed to serve. Rebuilding these relationships will rightfully be a gradual process that is dependent on the way we approach future sources and the nuance with which we write the stories we must. Until The Beacon is more aware of its biases and making clear, sub-
stantive change, you can still expect a paper on the racks by lunchtime Thursday. It’s our job to report on the college; to hold administration accountable during this time of great need; to keep track of the accomplishments and oddities in our community; to be the place for public opinion; and to serve as a clear and accurate reflection of campus life. We will continue doing that. Though with our smaller staff, it’ll be on a reduced scale. That said, I take responsibility. We take responsibility. And we know that now, more than ever, is the time to listen, time to understand, and the time to to face the systemic flaws of our organization. We are committed to a brighter, equitable future, and we hope you will join us in this effort. A news organization is nothing without its staff. And a newspaper is nothing more than litter without its readers.
© 2020 The Berkeley Beacon. All rights reserved.
Editor-in-Chief Diti Kohli
(617) 824–8687 berkeleybeacon.com contact@berkeleybeacon.com
The Beacon is published weekly. The Beacon receives funding from the Student Government Association of Emerson College. Anything submitted to the Beacon becomes the sole property of the newspaper. No part of the publication may be reproduced by any means without the express written permission of the editor.
Content Managing Editor Domenico Conte Visual Managing Editor Tomas Gonzalez Businesss Managing Editor Dylan Rossiter Advisor Rachel Layne
contact@berkeleybeacon.com
172 Tremont St., Boston, MA 02116
Letters to the Editor: If you want to respond to, or share an opinion about, an article in The Beacon, you can write a short letter to the editor. Email it to letters@berkeleybeacon.com.
The Max. Tomas Gonzalez / Beacon Staff
Letter: POWER responds to Gina Martin article As members of Protesting Oppression With Educational Reform (POWER), a group working to advocate for BIPOC students, we have a vested interest in how The Beacon and other predominantly white organizations on campus portray the BIPOC community. We do our best to be aware of the current feelings and standing of BIPOC students at Emerson College. The situation that Martin is in is unfortunate, and we are not insensitive to that. We would also like to preface that this letter isn’t an attack on Martin or any one person’s character, nor do we want to lessen the impact of this financial change in her life. However, within our immediately accessible community, we felt that this article amplified the voice of a white ally and, in the process, diminished the voices of BIPOC students and their experiences. The first indication of this was in the lede, which states “…Gina Martin told her Facebook friends Black Lives Matter. What she didn’t realize is how supporting a nationwide movement for racial justice—one rooted in equity, change, and betterment—would topple her own life.” The lede implies that Martin sacrificed everything for the Black Lives Matter Movement and is a martyr, and it redirects attention away from the BLM movement, as well as the Black lives that have been lost in the pursuit of equality and basic human rights. It implies that conversations about the movement is something that Martin can opt into, an indication of white privilege that is not recognized in the article. While the focus of this article was supposed to be about the financial predicament that Martin is in, the article undermined the BLM movement because of its focus on a non-Black woman. The article was framed in a way that seemed to portray her as a “white savior,” as if her financial predicament—and the social media posts that were the catalyst for this situation—alone makes her an ally to the BIPOC community. There is so much more that goes into being an ally. The first job is to take a step back and give those who have been historically si-
lenced a chance to tell their own story, rather than have someone else tell their story for them. Additionally, the article presents Martin’s punishment in a way that doesn’t consider the financial standing of many other students at our institution. People of color are more likely to come from lower-income communities due to the history of systemic racism and rarely receive the same press, social media attention, and support that Martin did, specifically from Emerson’s Financial Aid Office. The backlash and disownment from standing up for one’s values are all too common in BIPOC communities. The BLM movement should be by and for Black people with nonBlack people of color and white allies standing alongside them. This article highlights a white person’s experience with activism on the topic of justice for Black people in America, rather than the movement and pursuit of justice for Black people itself. Although The Beacon made an effort to report on the BLM protests in Boston over the past few months, this does not justify the publication of an article that redirects attention away from the BLM movement. The Beacon continued this process by centering this article on Martin and only providing the link to her GoFundMe, while failing to provide resources for BLM organizations. We hope The Beacon understands our dissatisfaction with this article and will work to change this manner of framing, addressing, and reporting on white privilege in the midst of a human rights movement. Editor’s note: Emily Cardona is a Deputy Sports Editor at The Beacon and Shruti Rajkumar is Assistant Lifestyle Editor. If you would like to submit a letter to the editor, email Letters@BerkeleyBeacon.com. Letters may be edited for style and clarity.
contact@berkeleybeacon.com