Editorial: The Right needs to write with reason

Published: Monday, May 19, 2003

The Daily Lobo, through some act of sardonic wit, has carried the moniker of Daily Liberal for quite some time and letters received by Lobo editors indicate that this reputation has arisen through content printed in the Opinion section. Whether this epithet is deserved or not is an object of debate.

In the past, letters and responses regarding content have trickled in, accusing editors of neglecting the conservative campus voice. These same letters assert that the Lobo also conflates the amount of liberal representation to an unjustifiable degree, hence the name the Daily Liberal.

But is the Daily Lobo the crux of liberal "propaganda" on campus? And if so, is this necessarily the fault of Lobo editors?

It should come as no surprise that institutions that expose the truth tend to be seen, at least in the public square, as leaning more toward the left than the right. A quick analysis of the attitude taken toward the media by Big Brother in George Orwell's 1984 will confirm this view. And although 1984 describes a totalitarian state, many of the techniques used by Big Brother are exaggerations of modern day conservative practices, i.e. the demand for more governmental control (of course, ironically, laissez faire is also desired) and the willingness to deceive the public in order to conceal unpalatable truths.

Thus, as a media source and revealer of facts, the Lobo is already stereotyped as moderate - exposure of the truth is often deemed dangerous by conservatives for fear of revealing too much.

But conservative qualms in this regard are not entirely unfounded. Despite newsmakers' efforts to reveal as little critical information as possible in their coverage of the war against Iraq, live broadcasts from American newsagents were assuredly being viewed by Iraqi intelligence officers. It's entirely possible, as many have vocalized, that reporting live from the battlefield actually assisted in Iraqi resistance, providing the "enemy" with helpful information.

However, magazines such as the Standard Review and the National Review are renowned for their reactionary conservatism, so not all news sources are necessarily branded overtly liberal.

UNM, and perhaps most college campuses, sees more activism on the part of liberalism. Whereas conservatives have higher voter turnouts, based upon the amount of pertinent letters submitted to the Daily Lobo, liberals more frequently express their objections in writing.

Perhaps the number of liberal sentiments received by the Lobo is indicative of the overwhelming majority of liberals on college campuses. Perhaps the number of liberal sentiments received by the Lobo can be extrapolated to reveal a national trend. Conservatives take physical action at the beginning of a situation, i.e. voting, while liberals procrastinate, don't vote and satisfy themselves by reacting aggressively through written display of ideals.

Or perhaps the real reason is that conservatives on campus aren't saying much that's worth printing. Perhaps the liberals are taking the proper initiative of submitting unique perspectives rather than uniform tautological complaints about Lobo inadequacies.

It's the responsibility of advocates of conservative policy to provide the Daily Lobo with material that accurately portrays the conservative voice and conservative views. This means submitting something other than the dozens of letters received that say, "I'm thoroughly disgusted by the paltry representation of the conservative voice in the Opinion section." Letters like this are unpublishable, for they don't express an opinion; they express gut reactions that anyone can have, not true conservative ideas that do the author's position justice.

This is not to say that submissions should not be emotional, they should. But they should be more than just that.

If the Daily Lobo is to represent the conservative voice accurately, letters expressing viewpoints with substantial conservative insight must be submitted. This means that conservative letters, as well as those expressing unfavorable reactions, should address politics, business, legal matters, ethical dilemmas, foreign affairs, etc.

But shouldn't it then be Lobo policy to print the few conservative letters that are submitted because they represent a minority view, and balanced coverage should be any news source's ultimate goal? Yes, but one can't squeeze blood from a stone.

If an elephant has a thorn in his foot that he wants removed, he won't achieve his goal by lying down in the underbrush and moaning. The elephant must think of new ways to remove the thorn, because repeating the same cry over and over doesn't accomplish much of anything.