Editors, the Gauntlet,
Re: Gauntlet Endorsement Supplement, March 8 & 15, 2001
I would consider myself to be a fairly well-informed politico. I've been active in politics for five years now, but admit that I am new to student politics at the university.
I've read flyers, listened to forums and even tried to get out and meet the candidates wherever possible. What strikes me as odd though, is that the Gauntlet offered up their own "ratings" of candidates. It seems to me that as a student-funded newspaper, the Gauntlet should provide unbiased coverage of all SU candidates.
Reading last week's issue, I saw cartoon depictions of the candidates in a squirt-the-clown carnival game format. After learning all I could about the candidates, it seems that some of the biggest clowns were ranked highest by the paper. While some candidates had prior experience to back them up, or a promising campaign platform, I couldn't understand the high ratings for some.
As a "regular voter" I feel cheated. Most students wouldn't bother trying to get to know their candidates and could simply base their electoral intent on the musings of a few Gauntlet editors with their own biases and preferences. With such power, the Gauntlet could stay true to journalistic integrity and not degrade the SU elections into a high school popularity contest.