First off, let me say that i mean no disrespect to Robert Stewart. It is always tragic when someone, of his age especially, dies, but is there a different person in charge of the paper? I seem to recall several students diing over the past three years, non of which do I remember seeing big front page write-ups for. Is it just me, or do you guys think that they should strive to treat all cases of this type the same way. To me, it is disrespectful for the poor kid who died a while back, and all he got was the equivalent of a fucking traffic report buried in the paper. I don't want people to think that I am saying that this shouldn't be on the front page, I have absolutely no feelings about that, but if my friend had died and got almost nothing deep inside the page, then I would be pissed when I see someone else on the front with a huge write-up.

What do you guys think? Am I reading too much into this? Am I an asshole, and I need to never speak again or what?

write a letter to the editor. they are required to print it.

I don't know the situation, but was Robert big on campus or something like that? It seems kindof insensitive to put another person's death over another, but our media does it all the time. If the president died, it would be the front page of ever paper, but I don't think any of our demises, however tragic they might be, will make CNN.

I do agree with your concerns though, and an even unbiased attitude should be maintained as much as possible.

No, I'm pretty sure they're not...

I've submitted letters before, and the only one they printed was about the Intelligent Design topic on the politics page.

I don't think there's anything wrong with writing an article about one person's death but not another's. If you think all should be equal in that case, why shouldn't all be equal as far as writing about student projects or organizations that exist on campus? Students put the same effort into different organizations on campus and only certain ones get press. Unfair?

The media has to choose what it deems as news-worthy and report it. For some reason Robert's death seemed more news-worthy (maybe there were less other things to write about than at the time of any other students' death? Could be a thousand different reasons).

I knew Robert personally, so maybe I'm biased, but I feel like my opinion isn't ridiculous.

Btw, I don't think he would be considered "big" on campus or anything...I do know he worked for the IT department though.

I can tell you the main difference is in management. We try to write about as many different organizations as we hear about. This week we lead with the student death becuase we had recieved multiple requests/notifications (therefore that story was the most in demand).

There wasn't too much else in this week's news becuase there wasn't too much going on. The news section (which includes the front page) can't really cover student organizations for just being there. However, if they do something significant (founded, win a competition, go to a competition, build something, etc...), then we can cover it. But this week, there was nothing. That is why there is/has been an ad in the paper asking UMR students to send in news leads, or even join the staff itself.

Sorry if it looks biased, but different editors give things different weights; and remember: It's all relative to that week's news. We can only report on what we know is going on.

Just tell the miner that they need an obituary if it's that big of a deal.

R.I.P. Rob

is robert stewart the one that got hit by the o'reilly truck over by the courthouse?
if not, what happened to that guy?

http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060402/NEWS01/604020367

Sounds like he just slid off the road and hit a bad ditch.

Robert was actually 21 years old. He had the top off of his car and it rolled.

That sounds reasonable, is there a different editor that last year?

I didn't say that I think ALL deaths should be reported in the Miner, but since it is a UMR newpaper, I think all UMR students deaths should be covered in as much the same way as possible. I have never thought that the news should make a big deal when someone famous dies, that pisses me off, and I have argued that to several people, but in the case of the President, that should have a pretty big deal made about it because it would most llikely affect ALL of us. We would be under a different President, whos policies are probably going to be drastically different than the previous one. Do I care if Bush Sr. or Clinton or Arnold Swartz dies, no. It doesn't affect me, I don't give a shit. Hopefully you understand what I am trying to say, and that I am NOT trying to say that a big deal shouldn't have been made over Roberts death, just that I wondered why it merrited a bigger deal than previous students deaths.

Slight tangent:

Last few weeks I've noticed the miner writing about something that was discussed on seek the week before (its happened a bunch but the one I remember is Dad's giving up their 'dad' rights).

Then there was an article in the April Fools section asking everyone to make stories that could be written about. Thats kinda stupid, there can't be taht little going on, even for a small school.

It's Rolla. There really is not that much going on.

As for the unequal coverage, it all depends on how well the person was known. A newspaper writer probably can't write much about a hermit that no one ever knew. It would probably be a few sentences long. More well known people can get on the front page because they have more information from family interviews and such.

I sure a hermit still has freinds, and I would guess that their family still knows them, and could be interviewed. If it was under a different regime so to speak, them my point doesn't realy exist, if it is the same editor, than I am pretty disappointed that student fees pay for it.

I've made several offers to write political articles with a Libertarian slant (to balance out the authoritarian Republicans and Democrats) but for some reason they don't want to have me writing for the paper.