Editorial Board reiterates policy in light of pending name change vote
November 2, 2020
The Grady Renaming Committee’s recommendation of the name Ida B. Wells will go to the Board of Education for a final vote on Monday Nov. 2. In light of this, and in regard to the Southerner’s editorial promoting Ida B. Wells in September, The Southerner Editorial Board wanted to reiterate our editorial policy.
“The views expressed in The Southerner do not necessarily express the opinions or the policies of Grady High School’s faculty, administration, adviser or students.”
The Editorial Board would like to acknowledge how the timing of the publication of this article could have been misinterpreted as an intention to influence the direction of this process. We would like to clarify that this has never been and never will be the intention of the Southerner. Our Editorial Board reserves the right to publish any editorial that the board agrees upon as it aligns with The Southerner’s mission statement and journalistic precedent to supplement community discourse.
The Editorial Board would also like to clarify that views expressed in the board editorials, including the recent Wells editorial, are not meant to influence decisions at the cost of the community’s opinion, rather they only represent the stance of The Southerner’s Editorial Board.
Audrea Rease • Nov 2, 2020 at 1:26 pm
Thank you for sharing this clarification. You should know that The Southerner itself is said to have been the driving force behind the current rename effort and is particularly credited with pushing forward the name of Ida B. Wells, despite what other students thought…those other students not being on this paper’s staff. The Southerner has a reputation of being completely biased on this issue, and it is very unfortunate that your journalistic integrity would be jeopardized in this way.
Janet Kishbaugh • Nov 2, 2020 at 9:12 am
I am glad student voice has been heard and the school name will change. In light of the Southerner policy just explained, have you given editorial space to equally well written defenses of the other names? Otherwise, I worry the paper’s bias will remain on record.