2008 Woodie Awards
Biased, incomplete reporting in 'Great American Boycott' article
Issue date: 4/24/06 Section: Letters & Feedback
Friday, May 12, 2006; Posted: 10:49 a.m. PDT
I am writing regarding the article "Protestors miss school, work to support Great American Boycott" in the May 8 edition of your paper. I write in disappointment that you published an article unfit for print.
First of all, the article is not very informative. It tells the reader that people missed work or school to attend a boycott protest. But without seeking outside sources, the reader has little indication what is being protested or boycotted.
As a reader, I do not feel informed. Had La Voz been my primary source for news, I would have been left in the dark.
Second, the article did not seem to be fairly balanced and only covered one point of view. All quotes come from the pro-immigrant protesters.
Though counter-protesters are briefly mentioned, their point of view is left out. We hear four opinions in the article, yet none of them are taken from the counter-protest group.
To add insult to injury, the counter-protesters are labeled as "anti-immigrant" in the article, a label that many of them would object to. One can be pro-immigration reform without being anti-immigrant.
I write because the article was unfair and uninformative. As a former La Voz staffer, I know this paper can do better.
Sean Buckley
De Anza student
I am writing regarding the article "Protestors miss school, work to support Great American Boycott" in the May 8 edition of your paper. I write in disappointment that you published an article unfit for print.
First of all, the article is not very informative. It tells the reader that people missed work or school to attend a boycott protest. But without seeking outside sources, the reader has little indication what is being protested or boycotted.
As a reader, I do not feel informed. Had La Voz been my primary source for news, I would have been left in the dark.
Second, the article did not seem to be fairly balanced and only covered one point of view. All quotes come from the pro-immigrant protesters.
Though counter-protesters are briefly mentioned, their point of view is left out. We hear four opinions in the article, yet none of them are taken from the counter-protest group.
To add insult to injury, the counter-protesters are labeled as "anti-immigrant" in the article, a label that many of them would object to. One can be pro-immigration reform without being anti-immigrant.
I write because the article was unfair and uninformative. As a former La Voz staffer, I know this paper can do better.
Sean Buckley
De Anza student
Be the first to comment on this story