As a sports editor, I feel compelled to respond to Zach Waksman, who expressed his dismay over the coverage of Wesleyan Athletics in the Argus. Zach, I suggest that you take a chill pill and lighten up on my sports writers.
You make a few good points about how a sports article should be written. All of us at the Argus appreciate that you’ve given 120 percent to every Cardinal sport that you have covered during your time as a writer. But ripping on my sports writers was a highly irresponsible thing to print as a Wespeak.
You suggest that my sports writers are “hurting Wesleyan Athletics.” Is this a joke? How do you have the audacity to say something like that? Many of my sports writers are first year students and may not have written sports articles before. Naturally, these articles might not be up to your “standards.” As they submit the articles, Mike Brady, the other editor, and I are constantly giving the writers constructive criticism on improving their articles. And in my first month as editor, many of my writers have improved the quality of their articles. Are they New York Times quality? Heck no. But are they gaining experience in sports journalism and improving the quality of their articles every time they write an article? Hell yeah, they are.
Your constructive criticism is appreciated. Mike and I have tried to ingrain most of these points in our writers’ heads. The articles in the sports section can use some work. But for you to suggest they are hurting Wesleyan Athletics is way off base.
Leave a Reply