Traditionally, the front page is reserved for news. Yet Jean Dobrzynski’s recent article was incredibly biased in two fundamental ways that influence even the most casual reader—in its headline and lead.

The headline “Peace rally, march fall short” refers to the war protesters’ gathering in the King Memorial Commons last Thursday.

Despite this headline (written by the Star staff), not one of the protesters says within the body of the article that they thought the rally “fell short.”

“Fell short” of what? Dobrzynski does not even go to the source to identify the goal of the protesters. But at the end of the article, she does supply an opposing individual’s view, “(the article, support) are missing the point.”

The words sound authoritative, since there is no defense for the protesters (as if, indeed, there should have to be “defense” for one side in a news article). The reader never hears their point.

“Some people thought the beat of the drums and the warm weather would coax more people to the King Memorial Commons Thursday for a peace rally.”

This statement is the who, what, when, where, why and how of the lead. Who is “some people?” Why should anyone have to be “coaxed?”

It’s as if we wouldn’t have been potentially interested in the politics of peace if not for that rhythmic funky dance beat on the drum and the near-tan-producing sunshine, as if only these ridiculous factors could draw people.

This unattributed “quote” can only represent Dobrzynski’s opinion.

And value judgments and hearsay just don’t belong in the top news story where they only serve to spurn fallacious conclusion.

Mary Lyons

Sophomore

Mathematics