We, the editors-in-chief, acknowledge the frustration, anger, pain, and fear that members of the student body felt in response to the op-ed “Why Black Lives Matter Isn’t What You Think” published in The Argus on Tuesday, Sept. 15. We hear the community’s concerns about the piece’s treatment of police brutality and its implications about the lives of people of color. We sincerely apologize for the distress the piece caused the student body.

Yesterday, members of The Ankh’s staff arrived at our offices to discuss their outrage at our decision to publish the op-ed. They demanded that an editorial be printed on the front page of The Argus. Because this issue feels urgent and out of respect for students of color, we obliged; an editorial is running on the front page for the first time in institutional memory. Over the past few days, we have discussed the piece and its flaws with many students. These conversations have crystallized for us the immense impact of our editorial decisions. The opinions expressed in the op-ed do not reflect those of The Argus, and we want to affirm that as community members, we stand in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement.

The Argus holds a position of power on campus in that it disseminates information to students, faculty, and community members. This gives us a responsibility to consider the implications of the articles we publish. We failed the community on Tuesday in many ways. The Opinion section, like the rest of The Argus, relies entirely on student volunteers to write its content. All Wesleyan students are welcome to contribute to The Argus. A promotion to staff writer, which is the position the writer of the Black Lives Matter piece holds, is not an endorsement of the writer’s views but rather a reflection of hir participation in the organization.

The Opinion section is open to any writer who wants to share a view, whether or not the Opinion editors and the editors-in-chief agree with it. While we strive to make articles as coherent as possible before publication, we edit opinions for style rather than content, even if they are unpopular, controversial, and widely contested. If it is a student newspaper’s mission to reflect the views and voices of the entire student body, then the Opinion section must be open to the entire student body.

That being said, we acknowledge that the way in which the op-ed was published gave the writer’s words validity. First and foremost, we apologize for our carelessness in fact-checking. The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts. As Wesleyan’s student newspaper, it is our responsibility to provide our readership with accurate information. We vow to raise our standards of journalism and to fact-check questionable information cited in articles, including those in the Opinion section, prior to publication.

Additionally, the piece was published without a counter-argument in favor of the Black Lives Matter movement alongside it, and this lack of balance gave too much weight to the views expressed in the op-ed. We should have addressed the unevenness of the Opinion section in Tuesday’s issue prior to publication. In the future, we will carefully consider the context in which articles are published and work to represent a wider variety of views, even if this entails holding off on publishing a particular op-ed until we have appropriate material to run with it.

Representing more diverse views, backgrounds, and stories in The Argus is a goal we set for ourselves last semester, and while we have made progress in our coverage of student of color events, we still have a long way to go. Though The Argus is completely run by volunteers, its staff is and has long been primarily white. We recognize that because of this and in light of the Black Lives Matter op-ed, students of color may not feel comfortable or welcome writing for The Argus. Moving forward, making our spaces available to all students will be our top priority, and we want to enthusiastically encourage students of color to contribute to all of The Argus’ sections and to use The Argus as a platform to share their experiences and opinions.

We want to acknowledge that because editorial positions on The Argus are both unpaid and time-consuming, economic pressures affect who can devote time to the paper. The Argus has previously attempted to pay its staff members, but in recent years, the WSA and SBC have cut our student worker funding, rendering us unable to offer paid editorial positions. We plan to bring this issue up again at the upcoming SBC meeting and to talk to the University about making The Argus part of its work-study program.

We have begun to make efforts toward making the newspaper a safe space for the student of color community and plan to continue them with greater force. Our first step will be publishing a Black Out issue—an issue of The Argus written entirely by students of color—in the near future. We are committed to making space for the student of color population in this publication in the future, including creating a column to discuss issues of race and racism at Wesleyan. We will also strengthen our coverage of student of color events, beginning with the publication of a news article about the After Charleston event in the next issue. Other initiatives will include closer communication with relevant student groups such as The Ankh and better publicizing of The Argus in spaces that celebrate diversity. We have already begun conversations with the student of color community regarding the aforementioned plans.

This editorial will by no means correct our errors or heal the wounds that Tuesday’s issue created. As we grapple with the knowledge that we have caused our community deep pain, we reflect upon and reconsider the way our publication functions. The system under which The Argus operates is inherently flawed; we’ve made it our mission to examine these flaws closely and do our best to rectify them.

  • gerald brennan


  • Anonymous

    “The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts.”
    Such as. What a shame the editors-in-chief not only throw the opinion writer under the bus, they curl up in the fetal position and beg forgivesness from the PC tyrants. Just another reason why modern journalism has such a black eye. Sad for America.

  • Sara

    Except the difference is, the Argus will not run a counter-apology to apologize to all of those below who are offended that by the apology. Because, for some reason, it is only appropriate for white people to apologize.

    The man who wrote the article is a veteran. How about some respect for the person who fought for the right to have freedom of speech, and, yet, he cannot even come back home and use it?

    You have created a division and only further fueled the issues with this movement. It is unfair that this group can stomp into your office and demand you bend to their desires. You’re actually quite representative of the media in which you likely model yourselves after… you report untruths just to keep peace, and choose not to question misguided movements because you need to keep them “happy.” Perfect future democrats.

  • Wendy P M

    It was an Op-ed! Why are you apologizing? Oh…because our leader has taught you well. There is no freedom, no courage and no future for this country with responses like this to an op-ed! Embrace freedom of speech and political discourse. The price is higher than you could ever imagine for backing down!

  • John

    I did not see ANY twisted facts or inaccurate statistics in the base article. Indeed it was all opinion with no facts or statistics cited. You are flat out lying to claim this in your rebuttal.

  • Tired of this stuff

    Where is the “do not like” option for this response by the editors? I’m also curious to know what are the inaccurate statistics and twisted facts you speak of. You should be embarrassed by your response to the op-ed.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t blame the editors for their appalling behavior. They are just students, and they have observed how professional journalists respond to political pressure: appease the mob at any cost, or find yourself out of a job. The industry and journalism professors taught these students how to surrender their integrity.
    The editors alluded to “inaccurate statistics” and ‘twisted facts’ but never actually cited any. That was calculated cowardice on their part.
    The school administrators showed more backbone than the future journalists at the Argus. When the suits have more journalistic integrity than the journalists, you have a fundamental problem that mob appeasement will only make worse.

  • Freegeg

    “The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts.”
    Can you support this statement?

  • America the Beautiful

    Surely the editors read the piece before it was published to check for inaccuracies. It disappoints me that you are not supporting your staff for their viewpoint and that the editors are trying to appease those who disagree with the article. BLM is a dangerous group who has no respect for authority. We must support our police force or we won’t have qualified people to do the job.

  • Dennis Fouhy

    A sad day for Wesleyan but not surprising given the liberal PC climate on college campuses these days. The editors have capitulated to a small minority who cannot accept the fact that anyone would challenge their views. The New York Times, Chicago Tribune and the majority of prominent newspapers have never required publishing a counter-argument as a prerequisite to printing an op-ed.
    The editors may be correct about the lack of black contributors; but where was the outcry from the black college community about that?

  • Paul Van Schaack

    This is the new college thinking. If you don’t agree with their way of thinking then your opinion does not matter. If Mr. Stascavage quoted inaccurate data or in “your” opinion twisted the facts, then as editors your job is to provide the accurate data, not your opinion of what you see has twisted facts. Back up your statements or shut up.

    • Angelina Cox

      Not JUST your opinion doesn’t matter, you must be made an example to the people.

      Rebecca, Tess, you make Chairman Mao proud comrades!

  • Anonymous

    The two women who wrote this drivel should be ashamed. Not only did they throw the writer of the opinion piece under the bus, apparently without even talking to him, but they cite “inaccurate statistics” and “twists facts” without mentioning the same. Sloppy, emotional crap. If this is the level of critical thinking on our campii, we are in trouble. All these little wienies want is to be coddled and never, ever have their assumptions challenged in any way.
    What we are seeing in this country are massive temper tantrums from those who want everything to be they way THEY want it. They are willing to shout down and censor anyone who does not agree with them. They even suggest jail for “dissenters”. These people are childish fascists, too consumed with their precious selves to even realize how chilling their little jackbooted pronoucements are.

  • Trace Williams

    Rebecca and Tess,

    Your gross ignorance expressed through your unsubstantiated rebuke of Mr Stascavage most eloquent and well formulated opinion piece is clearly evidence that you do not possess the intellectual capital necessary for a college student or employee. You should immediately tender your resignation and seek some remedial education to gain the intellect and comprehensible analysis skills to successfully participate in a college/university environment.

    Shame on the Wesleyan administration for not immediately taking definitive action to remove the two of you.

  • a great-grandmother

    I am very disappointed with the Argus..you have caved in to radical extremism. When a movement, initiated by whites, blacks or others calls for the death/murder of police officers and nearly destroys towns and businesses and an intelligent, insightful young man has the courage to write the truth….how dare you, how dare you, bow down to those who not only oppose free speech (unless its their own) but are,because of their silence, promoting hatred and violence. You have, as they say, thrown this young man “under the bus!” And shame on you for being gutless. The opposite of free speech is Communism!! And free speech does NOT give anyone the right to promote violence!!

  • Jon Weiss

    I support the article of Mr. Stascavage.

    As a retired Army Non Commissioned Officer I have been in Mr. Stascavage’s position.

    While on active duty at Fort Knox, I was encouraged by my command to write an article for the post newspaper, as a matter of “Professional Development.”

    So embarked on this mission, and wrote an article related to my experiences in previous duties.

    I was by Career Field a “Cavalry Scout”, but had recently completed a tour of duty as an “Equal Opportunity Advisor” much like a member of the EEOC for civilians. I had been assigned temporary duty as an adviser for the commander of one of the Major Commands on Fort Knox.

    The article I wrote raised many eyebrows among the primarily male dominated career field. The title of my article was “Why Not Female Tankers and Scouts”, and it was an advocacy piece for putting female soldiers in traditionally male only combat assignments, something “en vogue” today, but it was not a popular idea in 1993, when I wrote the article. There was as time following the article that I was shunned by some and given looks that were askance, but in the grand scheme of life, I survived.

    To Mr. Stascavage, I say. “Head up, Sir. Your cause is Just! There will be slings and arrows from those less enlightened, but as always we soldiers shall muddle through to victory!”

    • Anonymous

      Thank you for your service.

      • Jon Weiss

        You are quite Welcome.

  • Freegeg

    “Our first step will be publishing a Black Out issue—an issue of The Argus written entirely by students of color—in the near future.”
    Well, that would violate federal law since Wesleyan receives federal funds.

  • Freegeg

    “The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts.”
    I have read and re-read the opinion piece 3 times now. I can’t find one instance when the author cited any statics let alone inaccurate statistics. Can Rebecca and Tess explain their statement in their editorial?
    This editorial is nothing more than defamation and frankly just downright bullying.

  • Scooter Mcdoogle

    I am so tired of “offended” people getting their way instead of actually listening to valid, thoughtful arguments.

    What happened to intelligent debate? That is exactly what this opinion piece encouraged.

    Why is stopping bullying such a hot topic in schools, but in the real world bullies get exactly what they want?

    Backing down and pandering is an embarrassment. These editors should be ashamed to call themselves “journalists”.

    • Angelina Cox

      Communists in education happened to that. They need students stupid to rule them. They REQUIRE faux movements to destroy law and order to enslave you.

  • Amy Robertson

    Rebecca and Tess…….. Why are you apologizing for an article that states the truth? “We sincerely apologize for the distress the piece caused the student body.” So the truth is distressful to your student body? I find it hard to believe that the entire student body agrees with your statement. You also state, “The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts”. You fail to disprove his statistics and facts. What was inaccurate and what facts were twisted?

    Your comment “we stand in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement” is your right as it is Bryan’s right to oppose them. Do you get it now? It is called free speech! Something Bryan was willing to put his life on the line for while serving two tours in Iraq.

    Why are you and your fellow black lives matter supporters not concerned with this truth: 2013’s FBI Uniformed Crime Report “90% of black victims are killed by black offenders”. No one is marching for the black boy that got shot in a drive by another black boy. No one is protesting, looting or burning down their neighborhoods when a little black girl gets killed by a stray bullet while sitting in her home. Even though that bullet was fired from a gun held by a black man shooting at another black man. Where is your black lives matters outrage against that? Why is there no outrage against these acts?

    You are feeding into the media’s creation of the black lives matter movement and it is disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Unfortunately, you do not know that you should be ashamed of yourself and that is the saddest part of all. Wake up, ALL LIVES MATTER!!!!!!!!!!!! Your life or my life is no more important than the life of the stranger in the line at the grocery store and his/her life is no more important than the life of the guy bagging the groceries. We are all equal and your movement does NOTHING to help get that message across. DO YOU GET IT NOW?????? Sadly enough probably not.

  • Jon Weiss

    Re-Reading the Editor’s response, I am curious….

    The response states: “We recognize that because of this (that “The Argus” is completely run by volunteers, its staff is and has long
    been primarily white.) and in light of the Black Lives Matter op-ed, students of color may not feel comfortable or welcome writing for The Argus.” and then goes on to say “…we want to enthusiastically encourage students of color to contribute to all of The Argus’ sections and to use The Argus as a platform to share their experiences and opinions.”

    To this I must respond with the inquiry…,
    Why encourage “students of color”?
    Why not all students (regardless of color) who have the ability and desire to write?

    Is the Argus a publication dedicated to fairness and equality, or a publication of activism and special privilege? Further are the students of color at Wesleyan so helpless that they can do nothing for themselves? Perhaps I am mistaken, but I was under the impression that this nation’s institutes of higher learning were intended to prepare our youth for the future, and as such, preparing them to deal with adversity. If the mere publication of an OpEd is enough to dissuade students of color from coming forward and writing counter arguments, what is this teaching them? Are they to go out into the world of journalism and write only articles on subjects that are of no challenge?

  • Steve

    Rebecca and Tess are the poster children for politically correct whining liberals. The Op-Ed that was written was spot on and you whining liberals decided to support cop killers. Amazing.

    • David Puddy

      exactly…. all it takes is to stand up to the intolerance and the PC from the left and they will always just fade away in the end.

  • a real sheila

    “The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts.”
    Which statistics were inaccurate and which facts were twisted?

    • Freegeg

      I’ve read they op-ed piece three times. It cited no statistics. Not even once. It was a well styled opinion piece.
      The editorial is just utter defamation of the op-ed’s author.

  • David Puddy

    Folks, this silly article is another great example of how PC and the thought police have run a muck. A great example too of just how intolerant the wacko liberal left is.

  • enoughnow

    I read the original editorial in its entirety and found it to be accurate and well-thought-out. While it may be inflammatory, I saw no evidence of “…inaccurate and twisted facts”. If they escaped me, please point out what I have missed. This young man should sew the editors for defamation!

  • Andy

    Wounds? Fear? My my my, what a bunch of special snowflakes. I have serious doubts as to how any person who was wounded by an op-ed piece in a student news paper will ever survive in the real world.
    Alas, I return you to your safe space to mutually celebrate your universal status as unique snowflakes.

  • Freegeg

    Rebecca Brill and Tess Morgan, Editors-in-Chief

    These two ladies just ruined any chance of a career at any respectable news outlet. Their editorial reads like the nonsensical fit of a child. They lambast the op-ed for inaccurate cited statistics when no such citations exist in the op-ed. They mention errors in the editorial process yet fail to cite what those errors were. They criticize the op-ed’s author for his so called facts without offering any meaningful critique of those facts. They apologized for their carelessness in fact-checking an OPIONION piece!!! Ladies, what FACTS are you now critiquing?
    I’m sure Rolling Stone may have a position for Rebecca and Tess.

    • T Martin

      Oh, I don’t know about that. I hear the Communist Party USA is hiring.

  • Jim Prindle

    BLACK LIVES ARE FECCAL MATTER……In an enlighten society, individuals are encouraged to present opposing subject matter. This line, in all caps, has been appearing all over the UNITED STATES, most often as not spray painted on walls but more recently, on printed stickers that have appeared in every place imaginable.

    Yet, I have not seen or heard anything about this in the news or in various public forums.

    Where is the outrage !! Or better yet, why are a bunch of ” privileged ” college students CRYING AND YELLING about an informative OP ED about a group of professional protesters, paid to cause disruptions and violence in Black communities. Look in to who started BLM and fellow the money. Who or whom stands to profit most from social and class fighting ??
    Your supposed to be intelligent people… quit being led by the nose and find out for yourself what is going on.
    This OP ED is only the tip of the problem, but it gives you a ton of information to follow up on…stop crying and learn from it! Use it !!

  • Anonymous

    Intimidated in a profession that requires courage.

  • Mutzter

    “The op-ed cites inaccurate statistics and twists facts.” Specifically, what statistics were inaccurate and which facts were twisted?

  • Roger Meurer

    And here comes the bullying and that out and out NAZI filth from the lefties. Censorship in its finest form simply because they disagree with someone else’s opinion.
    That leftie indoctrination seems to have worked well at Wesleyan.
    Heaven forbid someone doesn’t toe the “progressive” line like they are “supposed” to.

  • Scottie B

    As a veteran as well, it’s a shame we have groups that try to create hatred and divide that we have put our lives on the line for. It’s even worse that people, like the editors of this publication gave in to the hatred, and in their letter, tried to make it sound like the original article was racist, and chose to promote segregation and racism. I think their intent was good, but as an editor, it should not be their place to stomp and criticize, especially a veteran, for using the 1st Amendment. Anything and everything seems to offend someone these days, and most of the time, it’s because those people choose to get offended. Most people these days, are good people. Most people these days, are not racist. Some are and always will be, just like there will always be criminals. Should an entire black population be demonized because a small minority of their race committed crimes? No. Should an entire white population be demonized because a small minority of their race committed crimes? No. So neither should an entire population of law enforcement be demonized respectively and used to promote a racist agenda. We as individuals are responsible for our actions, period. People, everyday, take someone’s good intention, and decide that they feel it is a bad intention, therefore someone should apologize. It’s a shame people think negatively like this. Has anyone ever tried to do something nice, like say “Hi, how are you?”, they look at you weird, with disgust, like you have just thought less of them and needed to voice that you feel there is something bad or wrong with them. Have you ever tried to get someone’s attention by honking the horn because their gas cap was open, but they think “WTF! That person has no right to honk at me, who the heck does he think he is, does he hate me?”, and they flick you off because they think the honk is all about something negative. I had someone ask me how I felt about the racist SB 1070 law being passed, that she felt that it was promoting racism. She was native american, and she told me, it’s spreading hatred to native americans because they can be mistaken as a mexican illegal immigrant. She said she went to the doctors office and the nurse was looking at her, writing things on a clip board, she said “I know she was racist and thought I was an illegal from Mexico!” I told her “Maybe she was just a nurse, taking notes like a nurse does, why would she have to be writing down racist remarks on a clipboard?”. I asked her why she thought those actions were racist, and she said, “because she looked at me while the doctor was talking and started writing things on the clipboard”. She got completely worked up in her mind that anyone that looked at her, was racist, with complete lack of consideration that maybe, just maybe, the person was just being normal? Same with opening doors for people. I was taught if you come to a door and someone is right behind your or even at the same time, open it for them, say hello with a smile, and offer to let them pass first, no matter who it is. Some people believe that’s sexist if it happens to be a woman when that happens. Again, someone, in their mind, chooses to take a positive initiative, and turn it into something negative in their mind and get offended. There are many people in this world that think those ways, that they assume someone is saying something bad, and absolutely always think negative thoughts first unless they can be proven by apology, that their action and intent was good. Positivity is contagious, but so is negativity. Instead of promoting racism and segregation, we should be promoting camaraderie and acknowledge good intentions, not twist them into something negative. I do find it odd that the BLM movement does not stand up for the majority of the innocent black lives that are not killed by police, but hey, if the majority of black lives is not their focus. I do believe when I turn on the news, and see mobs of people with a huge BLM banner chanting death to police, oink oink bang bang, fry the bacon or whatever the hate chant was at that time, that is not good for any movement wanting to end violence, and I think that is what the original article was getting at. I too, would not support a movement that supports people promoting the killing of the very people that are out their, sacrificing their lives, to protect us. It’s easy for anyone to keep a fire going by fueling anger and hatred, but all that does is keep the fire going… But if the wish is to move forward and put out the fires of the past, at some point, we’re going to have to embrace positivity, put away the hatred, and recognize that actions of individuals don’t represent and define a majority. The more we educate ourselves, not just get caught up in some person ignorantly generalizing that all cops are bad, the more we can embrace positive thinking and realize how far we have come together as one nation. Even though America was a very small percentage of the world’s thriving slave trade, and even though the majority of white or other people in america never owned slaves, look at what our struggle to end it did. Those struggles played a vital role in helping abolish much of slavery around the world, not just in America. Yes, I can see how someone, maybe one of these editors, could feel guilty if you were that small minority from a family who owned slaves, or you’re a democrat from a long line that helped support the Jim Crow laws or fight the abolishment of slavery back then. But again, the scope of the article is identifying a group that wants to generalize hate to an entire group of people, at the same time using it as a tool which feeds fire to racism and hate. That may not be that group’s intent, but that is the effect, whether anyone likes to acknowledge it or not.

  • Anonymous

    What was inaccurate? Why wouldn’t you specifically say what in the article was inaccurate? Your staff editorial is one of the worst examples of stifling free speech I have ever seen. As a veteran, I am embarrassed that I risked my life to protect your freedom. Acts of courage to protect you were wasted. You are poor excuses for human beings, spineless, weak, pathetic. You belong in China or Russia. Perhaps the communists have infiltrated your staff. They have done very well with you.

  • TommyLent

    It seems that the OPINIONS are what offended the Black Lives Matter folks.

    How can that be? That’s why they’re called OPINIONS! You see opinions anywhere and everywhere on line, some factual, some not, some respectful, some not, some absurd & funny, some not. Anyone with half a brain should be able to differentiate between these. Some people don’t even READ the opinions section because of that.

    I’m still waiting for some “facts” that were “twisted”. They continuously focus on the opinions.

    If the facts (correct or not) were in the opinion section but not in the main article, this should not be an issue at all. Again, there are plenty of non-facts in opinions, some purposely, some not, and some just based on emotion and to annoy people.

    They also say opinions are open to everyone.

    They should’ve finished it with “as long as you don’t disagree with the Black Lives Matter fans.


  • Oregon Conservative

    We have begun to make efforts toward making the newspaper a safe space for the student of color community and plan to continue them with greater force.

    Translation: We want anyone who agrees with the BLM movement and who likes violence to be able to express their opinions freely, but anyone who disagrees and states the obvious facts about BLM will be shamed or shut down.

    This editorial will by no means correct our errors or heal the wounds that Tuesday’s issue created.

    As stated by other commenters, please clarify which “errors” were made. Daring to allow an opinion to be printed that is contrary to the BLM violence and actually calls it out?

    This is some of the most disgusting groveling I’ve seen in a loooong time, and that says a lot.

  • Amanda

    This is a huge disappointment and blow to free speech that you’d apologize for an op-ed piece. Guess I shouldn’t expect anything more from a no-name university, but you had the chance to stand with free speech and chose to bend over for “offending” BLM. Ridiculous.

  • Tom F

    It’s interesting that the editors-in-chief referred to inaccurate statistics and twisted facts; however, they failed to state what those inaccuracies and twists are. Seeing through such a careless phrase like looking through a cheap curtain, it’s shameful that they would through this columnist – ANY columnist – under the bus with such ease and disregard.

    My degree is in Journalism from a nationally renowned J-school. Granted, that was 20 years ago; nevertheless, it seems to me that First Amendment protections of a free press should not be subject to social or political movements, regardless of the party or persuasion. Today, the Argus is bending to one sociopolitical group. Who is to say to whom they will bend tomorrow. I would suggest they ought to protect free speech no matter the persuasion. It is only by putting thoughts, ideas, fact and opinions out there for public consumption that true, unfettered, productive discourse can take place.

    I am conservative, and I want speech about conservative ideas to be protected. I have a friend who is liberal, and I want his speech about liberal ideas to be protected. As soon as the media capitulates to calls for censorship or group think, it is a slippery and treacherous slope down which we slide, not just as a journalistic profession but as a free society.

    It’s pleasing to see that Wesley’s administration recognizes this all important freedom. It’s disappointing, and frankly frightening, that the Argus editors-in-chief do not.

  • Michael Papas

    I’m just someone passing by, but I find this response rather appalling. What “facts” in the gentleman in question’s article were “twisted” in your mind? I think he wrote quite concisely and correctly. The only facts he listed were that seven officers were shot before your school year started, and that protests in the BLM movement were started after a few prominent and media-driven deaths of black men occurred. What was “twisted” about any of those?

    You are a student newspaper, and the idea that you would throw a student contributor under the bus in this way is appalling. Anyone else that would consider submitting an OpEd in the future, this is your warning. Apparently if you contribute something that a few screaming voices don’t like, you’ll be thrown under the bus and apologized for.

  • dcdave

    this is so fucking pathetic. hah

  • Anonymous

    What “inaccurate statistics” and “twisted facts?”

    Spineless editorial by the Argus staff.

  • SufferingFromFools

    What a lovely apology. Problem is, there was nothing wrong with the original editorial. This is just pandering.

  • Anonymous

    I listened to the interview done with Rebecca Brill on NPR this afternoon and was absolutely horrified listening to this story. The over-the-top reaction by students to the original op-ed piece sounded like something out of a French revolution history book. The author was asking some very important questions, and it sounds like a vast majority spent little-to-no time contemplating those questions… rather they responded like the very mobs the author was describing in his piece.

    To the editors: Shame on you for apologizing when no apology was needed. Leading a newspaper is not a popularity contest… and you aren’t doing your jobs if you’re not ruffling someones feathers. Look back at the history of the press in this country. Nixon would have successfully completed a second term if the press hadn’t published Woodward and Bernstein’s research. Nixon attempted to destroy every newspaper that published those reports, but the press stood up to his bullying.

    We are living in uncomfortable times, where ‘activists’ on the far left and far right have mastered techniques for getting attention to their respective causes. Those who shout the loudest, raise their fists, and use force to achieve their goals get their fifteen minutes of ‘fame’, but lose the really battle: The hearts and minds needed to effect real, lasting change in the word that comes through dialogue. The culture of outrage we live in resembles more the world of Orwell’s 1984 than what our Founding Fathers had envisioned for this country. Choose wisely which future you really want to manifest.

  • David

    I am ashamed a member of the press would bend to extortion and bullying. Be a REAL paper and tell the readers offended to STOP READING. Live up to your constitutional responsibilities. The #BlackLivesMatter movement is racist and terroristic in its rhetoric and actions.

  • Anonymous

    Whipped. Its sad to see them crawl like this. It really is.

  • Roger Meurer

    Police in Clayton County, Georgia have arrested Black Lives Matter activist Latausha Nedd aka “Eye Empress Sekhmet” after she posted a video calling for “open season” on police and “crackers” that also called for taking over police stations. The three minute video that landed Nedd in legal trouble shows her menacing a gun and a machete while dressed in camouflage.
    THIS is the kind of garbage you two op-ed apologists are SUPPORTING, right? After all, this is a “blacklivesmatter” activist, and you support blacklivesmatter, is that correct?

  • MamaRea

    Yes, it seems that the Argus is inherently flawed if creating a safe space means suppressing opinions. If the editors were concerned about facts, why not give the author the opportunity to provide those facts? Easy enough to check public stats from Baltimore police records. If supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement are truly concerned about making a difference, and not just noise, the questions raised by the op-ed piece are no only valid, but necessary. How many who composed and signed on to the petition have actually READ the Stascavage piece? The piece is balanced, clear, and thought provoking. It is a sad statement on the Argus it seems to have provoked censorship, and not debate.

  • Anonymous

    Militant thugs don’t like their motives and actions being questioned. BLM is nothing more than a racist, violent group that targets whites and cops. How ironic that the Free Speech Movement, which was started by leftwing radicals on university campuses in the 1960s, against the ‘oppressive establishment’, has now become the oppressive establishment. The Argus staff recoils in horror at the thought of the BLM being poked in the eye by the truth.

  • Laura Egendorf

    Oh my God, this is what the Argus has become?

  • Laura Egendorf

    The sad thing is that the man who wrote the Op-Ed is a 30-year-old war veteran. So a person who has had some actual life experience, and he has to deal with this pathetic showing by some 20-year-olds?

    What disgusts me the most is that there is no “safe space” on campus for Jewish students who don’t hate Israel. Are they allowed to express their views? Or are only certain minorities coddled?

  • Anonymous

    What PC BS! It is an opinion piece. When you state that the article had factual errors and twisted the truth, you then have an obligation to say what those were. Otherwise it is just a cheap shot at the validity of the article. If anything, you should not have backpedalled, but rather celebrated diverse opinions. Please pass this on to your partner in crime.

  • Scottie B

    It’s obvious this newspaper’s goal is to print whatever is non-controversial, politically correct, and safe and to muffle anyone with an objective opinion. Someone happened to write their opinion and use their 1st Amendment right, which this newspaper obviously doesn’t condone and acted quickly to snuff it out… They obviously didn’t care enough to read what goes into their paper and stand behind the 1st Amendment. They were quick to stab the writer in the back, that is for sure. What a bunch of hypocritical sell-outs…