Re: “Student transported to hospital and placed on 72-hour hold”

   I'm grateful that I live in a country where I can speak freely. I'm grateful that I live in a country where journalism is resilient in the face of constant hurdles. I fully believe that freedom of the press is vital to the well-being of a thriving society. However, I struggle to see the value and importance of the content of The Panther's Feb. 6 article, "Student transported to hospital and placed on 72-hour hold."

   While the story is certainly dramatic and grabs readers' attention, I think it is sensational journalism. In what way does any of the information given in the article promote the marketplace of ideas or add to any meaningful dialogue? The most significant consequence of this article seems to be the damage done to the student in question.

   In the California Law Review, legal scholar William Prosser states that news includes "all events and items of information that are out of the ordinary humdrum routine, and which have that indefinable quality of interest which attracts public attention." There is legal precedence for granting great freedoms to the press and The Panther is well within its right to publish the information as well as make the argument that the story is newsworthy. However, I hope that the individuals reporting for and editing the paper would come to the conclusion that it would not be the most ethical decision to publish the story.

   I understand The Panther is a student-driven publication and should be granted some leeway with any missteps. We are all students here and liable to make mistakes, but we are also here to learn and gain insight from those mistakes. However, when The Panther makes a gross lapse in judgment, who is it really affecting? The lives of those sitting behind the desks of its office? Or those individuals who are subject to the shoddy journalism and lack of good judgment?