Last issue, I didn't have enough room to use this space for a column – quite the good thing, from an editor's standpoint. However, it left some questions unanswered.So this week, I'll cover both what the Chronicle is, and how psychology professor J. Michael Bailey became one of our first non-student contributors with last week's "Academic McCarthyism."
On who we are
The Daily Northwestern provides NU students with what they need in a school neswspaper: Accurate, up-to-date coverage of events. It also does a good deal of opinion, analysis and humor. And students who work there leave with a collection of clips they can use to get jobs.
So why do we need a Northwestern Chronicle?
I've been asking myself that question since I started writing in 2002. When the Chronicle is at its best, the answers jump out at me.
For one, our paper is more lenient about writing style. You'll find first-person narratives, humor, satire and rants – hopefully high-quality pieces of writing that violate the hell out of the Daily's stylebook.
And, since we come out only weekly, we can take a step back from breaking news and analyze trends in student life. This week's cover story is the perfect example: You read about the muggings in the Daily, but it takes a Chronicle to look at the long-term battle for a crime-free campus.
Last week's cover story made the same point. For years the J. Michael Bailey controversy has been much talked about at Northwestern, and for the first time the professor decided to break his silence. He chose the Chronicle both because we'd let him tell his side in the past, and because we can publish 3,500 words in one newspaper.
And finally, we provide an outlet for libertarian and conservative views. The Daily will have a conservative columnist from time to time, but it's the Chronicle that exposes Northwesterners to the thought processes of the evil right.
I took a social inequality class, and the names Charles Murray, Dinesh D'Souza and Thomas Sowell didn't even come up. Without the Chronicle, some students might never learn of these insightful intellectuals. So this newspaper is not only something fun to read during lunch, but an exposure to ideas you might not learn about otherwise.
On the Bailey Controversy
Thanks to last week's cover story, most of you probably know the basics of the fight for and against psychology professor J. Michael Bailey. This week, in our letters to the editor, you can see the responses of some of his critics.
As an editor I can express no opinions about Bailey's claims; read the article at www.chron.org and decide for yourself if you believe him. But my personal experiences can shed some light on who this man is and what he's like for those who have never met him.
Given the nature of his research, and the rage behind the attacks on him, you'd probably expect one of two personas: the giddy scientist not afraid of making light of his subject matter (after all, Bailey's Human Sexuality class is notorious for its guest lecturers, most of them speaking about their own sexual abnormalities) or the loud-mouthed, bold controversialist.
But neither of those describe the person I found two years ago when I visited Swift Hall to interview Bailey for the Chronicle. At the time I was a features editor, trying to continue our series of Q&A-format pieces.
He was soft-spoken and serious through our conversation. His answers were concise, direct responses to my questions. There was some small talk, and even that showcased his tell-it-like-it-is personality – he noted my long hair didn't make me "look like the stereotypical conservative" who would write for the Chronicle, adding that he didn't have a problem with conservatism in general – but for the most part Bailey was down-to-business.
At the time the professor wasn't able to comment on the allegations against him, but when the situation changed he remembered the Chronicle. He offered to tell his side of the story, and of course we readily accepted.
To my knowledge, it is the first professor-written article we've ever run. There are of course conflicts with this setup, especially in that he is both a source and a writer. But nowhere else is his account available in full, uncensored detail.
On Who I Am
Bailey was correct in his observation. Most conservatives don't grow their hair long, play guitar, listen to heavy metal and stay away from church. But I do.
I guess my political beliefs are somewhere between conservative and libertarian. I believe in low taxes, limited government, gun rights, free markets, legal drugs and personal freedom. I hope that these beliefs don't prevent others from appearing, and being taken seriously, in the Chronicle.
This newspaper isn't about me, it's about ideas. So I will leave my personal story at that.
