Eastern Echo to revive reader advisory board following outcry over controversial KKK cartoon

Posted on Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 8:44 p.m.

Eastern Echo to revive reader advisory board following outcry over controversial KKK cartoon

By Tom Perkins

Eastern Michigan University's independent student newspaper has decided to revive its reader advisory board following an editorial cartoon it published last month that many deemed racially insensitive.

Kevin Devine, director of student media, said the panel will be made up of community members who aren’t involved in journalism but regularly read the paper and can provide insightful feedback. But he said he doesn't think additional staff oversight of the Eastern Echo is needed.

Those comments came during the second campus meeting held following outcry over the Sept. 28 cartoon. In it, a group of Ku Klux Klan members were drawn standing around a tree with a noose. Two male and female Klan members are looking at one another, and below it is the caption: “Honey, this is the tree where we met."

Last week, a forum left some students unsatisfied. Wednesday’s “Forum on Civility and Respect” brought four new panelists and was intended to continue the dialogue from the first discussion.

Many students turned out for the first meeting last week.

Wednesday's meeting brought far fewer audience members. Jason Promo, who drew the cartoon, wasn't in attendance, and only several staff from The Echo were present. Echo staff and Promo met with a group of roughly 30 black students for two hours after the previous panel discussion.

Wednesday’s meeting had a more conciliatory tone, although several students and staff questioned why so few faculty and university officials were present. They said it demonstrated a lack of concern on their part and questioned why EMU President Susan Martin wasn't at either discussion.

Brittni Brown, a junior involved with the student NAACP and Black Student Union, attributed part of the low turnout to poor marketing. She said no one from the university has sought the input of black student organizations.

She said she felt she was representing the black student body because most weren't aware of the event, and many who were had class.

“When I saw the comic, I was confused and a lot of my friends were confused,” she said. “We’re still confused and no one has taken the time to contact us — the NAACP, Black Student Union — and asked us what we think … no one has come to get our input. We want to talk, we want to have the outlet, but we feel like we can’t.”

The Echo staff and Promo said in a written statement and at last week's forum that the cartoon, which caught the attention of media regionally, was intended to question how people could express love while committing such heinous acts. They underscored that the editorial cartoon was not meant to be funny, but was designed to illustrate hypocrisy.

But students and faculty at both panel discussions said the historical association and how those images impact people of different backgrounds and races were lost on the Echo staff. They said a lack of understanding is at the root of the issue.

Panelist Judy Foster-Davis, a professor of marketing and former college newspaper editor, said she didn't believe the intent of the cartoon was to be malicious.

“However, there was a foundational problem with the lack of understanding of the historical association of those images,” she said. “There was limited judgment and a lack of experience — we’re talking about student journalists.”

She suggested a greater role for the staff advisors to the Echo, which is an independent publication. It does not run its content by university staff or officials prior to publication.

Foster-Davis said the image of EMU is tied to the paper because “Eastern” is in “Eastern Echo." She suggested dropping “Eastern” from the masthead and having the paper be truly independent from the university.

She said she doesn’t doubt the paper has a diverse staff, but said it lacks in “age diversity” and needs someone with more experience playing a greater role.

“We ought to think about change in the way things are carried out here in student media,” she said.

Carol Schlagheck, an EMU journalism professor, said she understood the image’s impact but fears conversations on sensitive topics that college students should have could be stifled by angry reactions. She said the forums have produced positive and necessary dialogue on race.

“I would hate to do anything that kill discussion or debate and would certainly hate seeing students so worried about having an impact that they have no impact,” she said. “Talking about these things is part of becoming an adult, let alone a journalist.

Devine oversees the Echo’s day-to-day operations and provides guidance on polices and procedures. He also makes suggestions on how students can better cover stories, but doesn't pre-read, edit or censor material before it’s published.

Devine said the paper will now run controversial content past more of its editorial team, but he doesn't think he needs to play a greater role in editing content. He added the Echo’s core staff is usually between 20 to 40 years old, although this year’s staff is younger.

“It’s your story, it’s your paper, you are the editor, that’s your job," he said. "But, again, they are young people and they are students, so some decisions will be made that reflect age and inexperience, and that’s the nature of it."

Panelist Linda Pritchard, department head of women and gender studies, said the steps taken so far are positive — if reactive — but said the university is experiencing a “teachable moment.”

“Hurtful things will be said, written and drawn — it’s what we do with these the experiences that is the important part,” she said.

Charnessa Paige, program coordinator for the university's Center for Multicultural Affairs, provided a unique view of the situation. She said no one should be afraid of students’ anger over the incident.

“What I see here is a beautiful struggle,” she said.

University officials said they're developing a program that will provide more opportunities for open dialogue on difficult issues.

Tom Perkins is a freelance writer for AnnArbor.com. Reach the news desk at news@annarbor.com or 734-623-2530.

Comments

superhappyfunbrett

Sun, Oct 24, 2010 : 7:35 p.m.

@Gild - I'd have to agree with you. 30 out of 23,000 isn't very much. But... I don't think all 23,000 read the Echo. I mean... Maybe more people would've cared if they actually cared about the Echo enough to know it's in print. But that's as big an assumption as assuming 0.13% is the exact number of people the comic offended. It's all guess work in the end, right? Actually, maybe this WAS blown out of proportion. Seeing as it has such a low circulation, why not let them print all the race baiting cartoons they want? If 30 is true, that's not enough people to make any REAL waves anyhow. 30 against... How many are staffed by this pseudo-paper? How many of us local patriots are offended by these few people being offended? If hardly anybody is reading this thing, then I guess only a few people can argue amongst themselves. I mean... Let THEM sort it out. Just look away... Why bother? I ONLY SEE A PROBLEM IN HOW IT AFFECTS ME. But seriously... Maybe you shouldn't have to self censor yourself. Maybe you decide to stick to your guns? Cool. Hope the self serving serves you well. But... You might also eventually see what happens if you don't take your readers viewpoints into account. (Or: Others, in general, through the course of your life.) You just may eventually find out how many people you truly are offending if you decide to remain careless. And it just may make for some very difficult experiences. But like I've said... It's a free world. Just don't be upset about the outcome of your decisions, you know?

gild

Sun, Oct 24, 2010 : 4:22 p.m.

@superhappyfunbrett: "The people" have spoken? Eastern has 23,000 students, and about 30 were offended enough to show up at a forum to discuss the cartoon. That's 0.13% of the population. One of the "easily offended brigade" blamed poor marketing. Come on. You can't self-censor just because a tiny, tiny, tiny sliver of your readership might object to something.

lumberg48108

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 1:31 p.m.

@KB Injustice? "Does anyone else who speaks out against injustices in this world past and/or present white or black also recieve the label of "whiners"? This is a political cartoon - it could be offensive, insenstive, insightful or all of the above - but what its not is INJUSTICE? Drama anyone?

lumberg48108

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 1:27 p.m.

insentive does not equal wrong many great orators (and comedians who comment on social culture) often push the boundaries of what could be considered insestive to some... again - that does not make it "wrong"

Tom Dodd

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 1:18 p.m.

I am among those who do not read The Echo, did not see the cartoon in question, but have an opinion nonetheless. After fifty years of teaching both Humor and Journalism, it seems The Echo's cartoonist and editor have provoked their community into consciousness. It is difficult to tell, at this great distance, if their act was intentional or not, but it certainly was effective. That is just what a good newspaper ought to be doing. Keep up the good work and do not take humor lightly. It's terribly serious stuff.

Cash

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 1:14 p.m.

mike from saline, No, I've been alert for the past 60 years, but thanks for asking! I suggest people think for themselves instead of applying tin hat fear of the left philosophy. And as for your "so what?" to my opinion, uh....that's MY free speech!

mike from saline

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 12:22 p.m.

@cash, Did you sleep through the 90s? Are you telling me you were not aware of the politically correct speech codes, and code's of conduct [like the one at the UofM] that were instituted in college's and Universties all across this country? So you liked the cartoon huh? To that I say, so what? What if you didn't like it? What if you felt it was [like kb said] racially insensitive? Should that realy matter? I'll stand by everything I wrote in both my post's.

Cash

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 10:56 a.m.

@mike from saline, The "left"? Where in the world did you conjure up that idea? I'm as far left as anyone can get and I think that cartoon should be on the front page of every newspaper in America... Why? Because it speaks to the hatred of the far "religious right" and the hatred cloaked as "Christian love"....and i n the ugliest of terms.

mike from saline

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 10:12 a.m.

After going back and checking what I posted last night, and then reading kb's comments.....all I can say is, I rest my case. Any serious asault on 1st Amendment, Free Speech rights, wiil come from the left. I guarantee it. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

Cash

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 9:57 a.m.

@superhappyfunbrett, I stand by my belief that the shock value of that hideous depiction was appropriate to draw attention to the behaviors we have seen in this country for the past 200 years and trending now especially with a black president and since 9/11 for Muslims. Had the political cartoon been a couple skipping in the meadow saying something hateful, I mean really, no one would have noticed!!!! The shock value of the hideous depiction and a couple expressing a romantic thought in the middle of it, is what it took to get people talking and thinking about it. Last week I was in a business in the outskirts of Ann Arbor and a female white worker was talking about the bible and her Christian faith to another lady, when a black lady came in to be serviced. After she left, the woman who had been talking about her great faith made the comment "that (animal name) smelled"...and they both laughed. That is a reality. That's the cartoon in a nutshell. Love/hate. And if it takes shock to wake up this country, so be it. One thought I had while digesting the political cartoon was that it's sad that the very thing the cartoonist spoke against...hate........is what is now used against him.

KeepingItReal

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 9:49 a.m.

Me personally. I would prefer the NAACP (Student Chapter) and the Black Student Union be more upset about the low academic achievement of their bretherens rather than focus on some stupid cartoon. It hard for me to believe those at the Echo did not realize beforehand this cartoon would elicit the kind of reaction it did. However, its important for African American students to not invest their time, effort and energy on things that have little consequences for their group. That cartoon will soon be forgotten. However, your bretheren that fail to graduate or thrive in college will be around for a long time. That has far more implications for your cultural group than that cartoon.

superhappyfunbrett

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 8:44 a.m.

Like I originally said, it's a free country. So someone or someones can purposely or not purposely publish a controversial comic in their local newspaper. However, freedom also allows a majority to become justly upset by it. As also mentioned before, you can do whatever you want. But if your actions are bold, you have to live with the consequences. (For better or for worse.) @Cash: I can see that angle. What YOU said makes sense. But as far as the comic conveying that? It's still a bit of a stretch, in my opinion. Even if you were trying to point out that "hate masks itself as love" - I'd have to say there are probably clearer (and much funnier) ways to denounce hypocrisy - and/or communicate ideas concerning any potentially controversial subject. All this did was create tension between people. Which is unfortunate. I'd like to think this was simply a misstep on the part of the comic creators. My hope is that they sincerely meant no harm. There is nothing wrong with confronting difficult issues and using your mind to do so. But I think there was a degree of shock value at play here that many found tasteless. Perhaps they will learn that if you are trying to engage the average person, you may want to try relation above potential alienation. Because, actually, yes... a joke becomes serious when no one finds it funny. And that's a pretty pointless joke. Personally, I'd rather think my actions through a bit more. But this is all just me speaking my mind. Which I am also free to do.

Awakened

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 7:09 a.m.

As an Eastern student I am excited about the elimination of the free exchange of potentially controversial ideas on campus. There has been far too much of that in this country ever since those crazy Tea Partiers through that tea overboard.

Cash

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 6:06 a.m.

When I first saw the political cartoon, I was horrified and wondered if anyone was reviewing the content of the Echo work. But after engaging the brain and realizing the meaning of the cartoon, it sent the perfect message and should have been front page! We preach tolerance and love (as shown by the loving couple) but ignore the hatred all around us and the hatred in our own actions and perceptions. Perfect example is religious groups that preach love but hate gays. Another is the minister in Florida...a "man of God" who wants to burn the Koran (until he was offered a free new car, which he is collecting as we speak). Another is minister who made racist jokes about President Obama. Another was an attendee at one of the meetings held about the cartoon who first claimed to be hurt and then shouted for harm to the cartoonist. You see? This is the message.....hate often hides behind the mask of love. The shock of the KKK scene drew attention to the message. For that reason, I applaud the cartoonist. I don't think this has anything to do with racial tolerance or lack thereof. I don't think it has anything to do with freedom of the press. I think it has everything to do with the state of America today. The mask of love....covering the hatred beneath.

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 5:51 a.m.

WOW @Alan Goldsmith! The NAACP (student chapter) and the Black Student Union are "whiners"? Hmmm... Do civil rights fighters also fall into that catergory? Does anyone else who speaks out against injustices in this world past and/or present white or black also recieve the label of "whiners"? As also an alumni of Eastern Michigan University I have great pride for my university and it is truly unfortunate that certain people feel that these types of incidents should be swept under the rug or treated as a non-issue. The responsible party's involved (the writer of the cartoon and the Eastern Echo) should take responsibility for what occured and work out a resolution with the students and faculty. These types of incidents can be prevented from occuring. Just an apology and acknowledgement that the cartoon was offensive would be a start.

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 5:48 a.m.

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 4:49 a.m.

(superhappyfunbret) I could hug you! Thanks for your insightful and articulate synopsis. Unfortunately some classes and/or races of people will never develop the sensativity required to understand how racism and predjudices affect certain ethnic groups. Current year 2010... black president... Barack Obama. But alas... racisim/racial insensitivity is even more rampant then ever. So people please dont bring other issues into this topic such as the right wing, left wing all around the mulberry bush republican, democratic stance because this is not a political issue. A college age journalist and a college newspaper decided to create a racially insensative cartoon depicting the KKK in a midwest city that prides it's self on the diversity of it's students and citizens/residents. How is that funny and how is that a non-issue?

mike from saline

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : 12:04 a.m.

When the left talks about free speech, there talking about there speech not yours. case in point; NPR and the fireing of Juan Williams today.

jameslucas

Fri, Oct 22, 2010 : midnight

A joke is a very serious thing.

superhappyfunbrett

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 10:46 p.m.

Yes. Agreed. But Bill Hicks didn't write for the Eastern Echo. You have to know your audience and your outlet. What may be perfectly acceptable in some edgy comedy commune may not fly at your small town collegian newspaper. Is that wrong? I guess we can debate it if you really want to try and change this portion of reality but the fact remains as of right now... Most people will say yes. Yes as in: "Yes - I find a KKK cartoon joke involving allusions to lynching african americans in my school paper as being wrong, and I don't want to see it." I'd like to think that when you're published media, you have to respect the response of your people at large to a rather healthy degree. And it sounds like the people have spoken. Part of becoming a grown up is having common sense and knowing what is appropriate given your current environment. But like I said... You live with the consequences of your actions. Sounds like someone tried to make a risky joke. And the risk came back and bit them in the rear end. So it goes.

lumberg48108

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 10:21 p.m.

superhappyfunbrett

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 10:16 p.m.

1. Pointing out what is obvious to most of us, for the sake of the few feigning ignorance (or who perhaps are sincerely unperceptive?): The cartoon seems to be implying the KKK members met during the lynching of another human or human beings. Lynching for most americans conjures up the brutality shown in the history of the KKK towards those of african american heritage. I think the cartoon may be considered offense because it appears to be making light of this rather painful subject. Having said that... 2. "They underscored that the editorial cartoon was not meant to be funny, but was designed to illustrate hypocrisy." I think what is confusing to a lot of people is: How does this illustrate hypocrisy? If this could be justified with a logical explanation, then we wouldn't be having this issue. However, the fact seems to be that it was very much meant to be "funny". Somebody or some group of bodies decided it was a good call to use it; in hindsight, it looks like it was a rather insensitive (thus bad) call. 3. Whether or not the intent was misconstrued or not may be moot at this point. Hopefully this will be a learning point for the staff as individuals, the school, and the readers/student body. This is an unfortunate situation, in that people are hurt. But the goal should be enlightenment achieved through communication from all involved, which will ease tension and (hopefully) prevent future such issues. This is not a great moment, but it is a moment and life will go on. 4. The proverbial "line" for which humor shouldn't cross is different for all individuals. It is usually designed by one's own ideals. So what one person is okay with might make another person furious. With something such as a newspaper (even a collegian one), you have to be careful not to put your own ideology over that of the outlet itself. Which seems to have been the case here. Some people may not find this cartoon offense. Most people probably will. Some people are okay with 9/11, Holocaust, or dead US soldier jokes. But the fact remains, most people simply are not. It's a free country, yes. But you have to use your common sense. Think about what the reaction of your actions are most likely going to be, and what your true motives are - and deal with the consequences accordingly once you have made a decision. That's a part of growing up. In my opinion, the outcry over this dark use of "humor" is a perfect example of learning what happens when you don't think things through. (Or - you just don't care if it's negative? Sure hope not.) Most likely, a lesson gets learned here, and all can progress positively.

Macabre Sunset

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 10:03 p.m.

I'm reminded of the age-old joke: Q: How many _______ (insert a pro-PC group here) does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: That's not funny!

Julius

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 9:48 p.m.

Saw the comic. It's not funny at all, but I don't see the need for all the hypersensitivity. It did not need all that attention. No one would have remembered it a week from now.

lumberg48108

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 9:13 p.m.

The term "racially insenstive" is meaningless in an argument - you have to state why the comic is an issue "When I saw the comic, I was confused and a lot of my friends were confused, she said. Were still confused and no one has taken the time to contact us and asked us what we think no one has come to get our input. We want to talk, we want to have the outlet, but we feel like we cant. Well, I am confused too - cause no one has said why its such an issue yet? And since when does a student newspaper need the approval of certain student org's to go about its business?

treetowncartel

Thu, Oct 21, 2010 : 8:20 p.m.

Where were these people when sign up day to work on the Echo was held in the commons? The kids at the paper put all their time and effort to it, and now somwe students want to make it their current cause. Have any of them even attempted to write an editorial?