How very odd that the Star should call for the Student Association’s impeachment processes to be held in the open when the Star’s management board closed its editors’ forum only the night before the editorial ran.

Why is it the SA’s personnel decisions should be held in the open, but only a select few had the honor to choose the next editor of the Star?

Are they not both student organizations? Do not the functions of both organizations affect the campus population?

The foundations of the Star are built on a mountain of hypocrisy. The editor who wrote the editorial should have looked more closely at the words and their meanings.

All three editors who take part in the editorials are members of the management board which made the final decision to close the selection process.

The closure by far failed to show the openness and good-faith effort that the Star called for by advocating the SA to keep their personnel meetings open.

It was “easy to close the meeting,” wasn’t it? Apparently all students except those working at the Star “deserve the right to know who is taking what position and why.”

I cannot understand why the Star would take such a

osition in regards to other organizations when its management so clearly did not want their own personnel decisions to be made in the open.

The Star willingly and happily denounces policies of the SA and other campus organizations, but fails to apply the same suggestions to themselves.

Kelli E. Christiansen

Senior

Journalism

President, Society of Professional Journalists