The last week included a number of conversations about the nature of journalistic discourse on EMU’s campus. We, as editors, have been grappling with questions regarding anonymity, safe spaces, and inclusion of voices. We want to publicly acknowledge that we made a journalistic error when we chose to grant anonymity last week.

Before publishing, we considered our decision and believed that we were contributing to a culture of conversation on EMU’s campus.

However, after many conversations with our advisor, fellow students, and editors of college newspapers of a similar size, we can conclude that the opinion page that week was not the space to include anonymous articles.

We recognize the dangerous cycle that this use of anonymity can perpetuate—unfair attacks on specific people, unproductive dialogue, and a deeper sense of hurt for many.

Nearly all credible news sources choose not to grant anonymity to opinion writers, especially as freely as we did last week. Earlier this year, The New York Times entered this conversation when it chose to publish an anonymous opinion piece published by one of Trump’s senior staffers.

If even large, respected news sources are grappling with these issues, we recognize that it can be hard to determine a “right answer” in instances like these.

We also recognize that students have a variety of reasons for wanting to remain anonymous on the opinion page. We know that it takes courage to state an opinion for the whole campus to read. Sometimes personal safety is at stake.

We hope that this is not the end of our conversations. We continue to welcome opinion pieces from students coming from all perspectives and experiences. The Weather Vane continues to affirm its intention of making this space safe for everyone. If you feel strongly about any topic, we welcome an article from you.

As a body of editors, we believe that The Weather Vane is capable of holding a diversity of thought, while affirming the needs of an entire student body.