But is it respectable journalism

As a member of the Student Action Working Group (SAWG) at the U of M, I was interviewed by the Manitoban staff writer Chelse Mckee for her recent article [“But is it Art?” Nov. 5] I was under the impression that she was speaking to a variety of people and gathering a balanced view of students’ reactions about the Gallery of Student Art (GoSA) exhibit from Oct. 27th to 31st, and then based on the information she had, organizing her article as objectively as possible. However, upon reading the article, I realized that I was dramatically misled in this regard. During the entire week that the Gallery was open for students to experience the show, the author of the article “But is it art?” did not even step one foot into the gallery! So I am asking Chelse, other Manitoban staff members, and students at large: do you think writing a review on an art exhibit that has not been viewed or experienced can be classified as respectable journalism? As a Womyn and Gender Studies major, I am used to having my views challenged on a day to day basis, and welcome the opportunity. How would I ever grow as an academic and a person if that never happened? However, what I have a problem with is a “journalist” using tools such as a newspaper, to express their own personal biases under the cloak of objectivity and professionalism. That is exactly what Chelse has done with her staff position at the Manitoban. If I had known last Wednesday when I gave my time to Chelse for an interview what I know now, I would never have agreed to the interview. When a “journalist” writes a critical response to something that she has not even seen, it makes me question her hidden agenda and ulterior motives. What Chelse fails to understand or explain in her article is that GOSA is an UMSU service that is student run and student funded, therefore, is available for all students, Fine Arts or not, to promote and display their artwork, and as such, has been used by countless other student and service groups on campus since its creation several years ago. As an example, World Opportunities Week is making use of the student art gallery to promote the activities that are going on campus this week, but I highly doubt that we will see an article questioning the artistic expression of that exhibition in next week’s Manitoban. Chelse had ample opportunity to experience what was on display in the gallery which is located about 10 seconds away from the Manitoban office, but felt that she didn't need to research what she was writing on, for whatever reason. I am guessing that if she did not even enter the gallery, then she did not look at the comment book where students could leave feedback, and was certainly not outside the gallery asking students opinions as they were entering and leaving the gallery. So where are student voices in the review? At least SAWG put student voices front and centre, which was the point of the exhibition, to give students a chance to speak out on an issue that will personally affect them and where no other public avenue was given. Art is a form of expression, and this show was a medium for that expression; art is also in the eye of the beholder, and I don’t enjoy the elitist message that Chelse is portraying by saying our expressions are not worthy of being called art. Claiming something is or is not art is not a judgment that can be made without actually experiencing what the person is making a judgment on. I know I will be taking future articles from Chelse with a grain of salt. This instance also makes me question the position of the other two anti-CFS and anti-UMSU articles that were written this month. Is Chelse's incident an isolated one or was her journalistic dishonesty allowed to occur because of a wider acceptance of anti-UMSU bias at the Manitoban? I guess that is a question that students must ask about their student funded newspaper and be conscious of when picking up the Manitoban. <em> Alanna Makinson</em>