Since starting at UM last August, I’ve been thrilled to see everything the campus has to offer. While it is to be expected that not everything would be to my taste, I must admit that the newspaper has proven more than a little disappointing. First of all, it seems natural to expect a college-level newspaper run by journalism students to appear as such. However, the numerous errors suggest otherwise. Additionally, the paper often reads as a series of rants that were compiled last minute; very little research ever seems to be done on major articles and the articles tend to glaze over important issues.
For example, before denouncing SG for not doing anything about the projects, it might behoove The Hurricane staff to actually do some research. To bash fellow students with limited power is a bit arbitrary. Even more frustrating is the coverage of stories. An example would be the current SG election. Although some space was devoted to the vice presidential debates and a brief spread comparing the three presidential candidates, only a small blurb with a tiny, angled picture was printed on the presidential debates. The blurb stated that “full coverage” would be available on the Web site. Yet, when I went to the Web site to see what the “full coverage” was, I was met by nothing more than the same picture and blurb. I was present at the debates and there was certainly more to report on than the fact that they happened. Additionally, nothing is ever mentioned about any other elections. During election week, the paper should be encouraging students to get out and vote, not pushing the issues under the rug. Because if students aren’t involved, then SG doesn’t know what the student body wants. And when SG doesn’t know, they get blamed for not meeting the students’ needs – particularly in this paper.
– Rachael Goldberg
The Miami Hurricane wrote a story on the SG presidential debate, which was posted online last Friday. Also, the editorials on Feb. 11 and 21 encouraged students to vote.