Does The Crumbling Marshall Building Pose a Threat to Us?
I wrote this article for my community college paper, the Compass, after just taking the reins of Editor-in-Chief from my predecessors, mid-semester. At the time there was already plenty of drama in the newsroom over their abrupt resignations, and there was an eagerness to return to the normalcy of reporting on the news and pushing papers. So when a chance conversation with a campus safety officer led to a scoop on a potentially controversial story regarding the deteriorating conditions of a building on campus, I naturally went ahead full-speed, looking for a new topic to divert my staffs' attention away from our current controversy.
However, once the article had been published it became clear that the Compass had jumped out of one frying pan and into another. The school administration naturally didn't take too kindly to our reports of a building falling apart on their watch, and they even went so far as to surmise my protecting the privacy of my primary source (the campus safety officer) to be an example of "shoddy journalism". Luckily my Faculty Advisor leapt to my defense, vehemently defending my rights as a journalist and our paper's freedom of the press.
The real controversy surrounded a bizarre communication failure within the campus staff. As part of my source's tour of the Marshall Building, they had pointed out what was referred to as a "safe haven" located at the building. In New York State, a safe haven is a designated location, typically near a firehouse or police station, where a parent can leave an unwanted newborn without any penalty, where frequent checks of the area occur to
take care of any unexpected deliveries.
As it turns out, the college had its own type of safe haven- a designated spot where phones had been installed with direct lines to campus safety in case of an emergency. Unfortunately, this resulted in some confusion, as neither myself nor the officer were aware of the campus' system, and were under the assumption that the safe havens at this particular building were of the state-wide variety.
Suddenly we faced the grave prospect that a parent might have read our article and assumed what we had, and leave their child in an area where it would not be safe. I ended up printing a followup in the next issue, in which I found myself explicitly stating that newborn infants were not to be left at the Marshall Building- one of the strangest things I've ever written to this day.
Eventually, the controversy settled down, and the Compass' reputation actually improved among our readers, who were pleased to see the paper finally getting back to its trademark of reporting hard-hitting campus news stories. The ordeal also proved to be a valuable learning experience for me as both a reporter and an Editor-in-Chief, as my journalistic integrity had been put to a very real test. I had to reassert, several times, that I printed the story not for shock value or to move papers, but because I felt the issue at hand warranted a strong take in order to force the powers that be to recognize a problem and deal with it. And deal with it they did.
You can view the full article in its original form here, and the follow-up here.
However, once the article had been published it became clear that the Compass had jumped out of one frying pan and into another. The school administration naturally didn't take too kindly to our reports of a building falling apart on their watch, and they even went so far as to surmise my protecting the privacy of my primary source (the campus safety officer) to be an example of "shoddy journalism". Luckily my Faculty Advisor leapt to my defense, vehemently defending my rights as a journalist and our paper's freedom of the press.
The real controversy surrounded a bizarre communication failure within the campus staff. As part of my source's tour of the Marshall Building, they had pointed out what was referred to as a "safe haven" located at the building. In New York State, a safe haven is a designated location, typically near a firehouse or police station, where a parent can leave an unwanted newborn without any penalty, where frequent checks of the area occur to
take care of any unexpected deliveries.
As it turns out, the college had its own type of safe haven- a designated spot where phones had been installed with direct lines to campus safety in case of an emergency. Unfortunately, this resulted in some confusion, as neither myself nor the officer were aware of the campus' system, and were under the assumption that the safe havens at this particular building were of the state-wide variety.
Suddenly we faced the grave prospect that a parent might have read our article and assumed what we had, and leave their child in an area where it would not be safe. I ended up printing a followup in the next issue, in which I found myself explicitly stating that newborn infants were not to be left at the Marshall Building- one of the strangest things I've ever written to this day.
Eventually, the controversy settled down, and the Compass' reputation actually improved among our readers, who were pleased to see the paper finally getting back to its trademark of reporting hard-hitting campus news stories. The ordeal also proved to be a valuable learning experience for me as both a reporter and an Editor-in-Chief, as my journalistic integrity had been put to a very real test. I had to reassert, several times, that I printed the story not for shock value or to move papers, but because I felt the issue at hand warranted a strong take in order to force the powers that be to recognize a problem and deal with it. And deal with it they did.
You can view the full article in its original form here, and the follow-up here.
Front page
Full-color centerfold spread
Follow-up article in response to administration criticism
