Editor’s Notebook: Response to Bhuyian’s question

In his most recent Wespeak, Joel Mahmoud Buhyian raised an interesting question about the Argus’s role in protecting writers from libel. Specifically, he asked whether there are “procedures from Argus editors to validate accusations, especially ones made to attack the credibility of previous writers.” Bhuyian requested a response from the editors. As Wespeaks editor, I have been in a position several times this semester to question whether certain Wespeaks were publishable, usually because they included personal attacks on individuals. Some students have pointed out that a “personal attack” on a group of people (in the case of the ongoing debate on these pages, Muslims) might also qualify as libel. We haven’t yet omitted any Wespeaks on the grounds of group defamation, but that does not mean we never would—it is simply to say that just as in the case of Wespeaks addressed to individuals, there is a difference between criticism and libel. We have not used the criterion of “validity” to decide whether or not to print a Wespeak. If, in a Wespeak, a fact stated as such is clearly incorrect, we will generally contact the writer before publication. But these are opinion pages, and for them to remain so by the Argus’ editorial standards, they must be able to accommodate all opinions that do not venture past the fine line that separates free speech from hate speech. Whether a Wespeak crosses that line is a call we have to make as editors, and one that readers are always welcome to question.