F
or the foreseeable future,
The Daily does not plan
to
publish
anonymous
Op-Eds or Letters to the Editor,
with a few clear-cut exceptions.
In order for us to publish an
anonymous Op-Ed or Letter to
the Editor, three things must
be true: The piece must be
specifically relevant to those on
campus, the story or argument
can only be told or made by the
writer requesting anonymity and
there must be some reasonable
expectation that publishing this
piece with a name attached would
directly endanger the writer.
Anonymous commentary has
a long and storied history within
American news publishing. The
United States very likely would
not exist in its current form
without the rhetorical exertions
of Publius — the pseudonym
adopted by Founding Father
Alexander Hamilton as he tried
to get New Yorkers of the 1780s to
buy into the new federal system.
The
Michigan
Daily
has
hosted anonymous writers as
well; they have written on a
variety
of
important
topics:
Chinese students have criticized
the Chinese government and
survivors of sexual assault have
told their stories with a frankness
that would not have been feasible
with their name attached.
The Daily receives a great
number of Op-Eds and Letters
to the Editor. Every morning,
we, the editorial page editors,
wake up to about 30 Daily-
related emails in our inboxes.
Some of these are mass-emailed
to every college newspaper in
the country, unspecific, serving
as a tirade on the topic of the
day; some are from University
of Michigan students wanting
to write a restaurant review or
opine on international politics;
and some — the ones we tend to
publish — are from community
members wanting to write about
tense issues closer to home.
Some of those writing about
U-M specific issues, such as
antisemitism or Islamophobia on
campus, request anonymity.
Given that fairness in coverage
is one of our primary goals as an
organization, we have generally
preferred to grant anonymity
rather
than
potentially
risk
the perception of favoritism on
crucial local issues. These are
the issues for which it is most
necessary that our coverage
be perceived as balanced, as
students do not have access to
a robust network of competing
media on local issues like they do
for national issues.
These
decisions
about
anonymity are often difficult.
While we do have a set process
for deciding which submissions
are selected for publication, The
Daily does not have a robustly
defined set of policies regarding
granting anonymity to Letter
writers and Op-Ed contributors
who request it. Usually, it is at
our discretion as the editorial
page editors.
Our ability to utilize our
discretion has, in the past, been
affected by the decisions of
previous editors who — in good
judgment and in line with our
practices at that time — decided
to grant anonymity when we
might not have. When we as
editors have declined to publish
a
given
piece
anonymously,
a
common
complaint
is
that
previous
writers,
often
arguing the opposite position
of the prospective anonymous
writer, have been afforded the
opportunity to write within our
pages without having their name
published.
We are publishing this letter
to fix this problem of competing
precedents
and
define
our
institutional
goals
regarding
anonymity.
If you are interested in writing
a piece about an issue, and are not
interested in being identified, we
would encourage you to connect
and collaborate with those on
campus who are comfortable
being named.
There is value to being named
as an author of a piece — it
encourages writers to be more
honest and thoughtful when
writing on contentious topics by
adding accountability. We are
hopeful that making this change
publicly will only strengthen
the quality of content being
published from guest writers
while helping to defuse tension
on campus between nameless
and faceless adversaries striking
at each other through the curtain
of anonymity.
Opinion
From the Editors: How do we decide
whether to publish anonymous Letters
to the Editor and Op-Eds?
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
8 — Wednesday, April 12, 2023
QUIN ZAPOLI &
JULIAN C. BARNARD
Editorial Page Editors
Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
SHANNON STOCKING
AND KATE WEILAND
Co-Editors in Chief
QUIN ZAPOLI AND
JULIAN BARNARD
Editorial Page Editors
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of The Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Ammar Ahmad
Julian Barnard
Brandon Cowit
Jess D’Agostino
Ben Davis
Shubhum Giroti
Devon Hesano
Jack Kapcar
Sophia Lehrbaum
Olivia Mouradian
Siddharth Parmar
Rushabh Shah
Zhane Yamin
Nikhil Sharma
Lindsey Spencer
Evan Stern
Anna Trupiano
Jack Tumpowsky
Alex Yee
Quin Zapoli
JULIA VERKLAN AND
ZOE STORER
Managing Editors
Debates
on the
Diag
O
n Wednesday morning,
members
of
the
Graduate
Employees’
Organization and their allies
gathered on the Diag in support
of GEO’s demands for a fair
contract and a living wage
for all. The air was brimming
with energy, and I felt proud
to be joined by many other
impassioned
undergraduate
students who showed up in
solidarity with GEO. Alongside
current and former Graduate
Student Instructors, we marched
and chanted for a more livable
University of Michigan — it was a
powerful and historical moment.
Hundreds
of
undergraduate
students were there in support
because every single one of us
has a stake in this fight. Here is
why you should sign up to join us
on the picket lines.
Why should the GEO strike
matter
to
undergraduate
students? Simply put, graduate
student working conditions are
our learning conditions and
their demands are in our best
interest. Graduate workers are
an essential part of our campus
community, and without them,
the University would not be able
to provide such a high-quality
and
sought-after
education.
Graduate workers not only do
the academic labor of grading
papers, guiding class discussions
and helping students with course
material, but also the emotional
labor of providing support when
students are struggling in their
personal lives. Think about the
positive difference that GSIs
have made in your lives. They
work far more than the 20 hours
stipulated in their contract, but
they are treated like part-time
workers for full-time work. We
all deserve a campus that fosters
a healthy quality of life for those
who live and work on it.
GEO graduate workers are
demanding a living wage of
$38,500.
The
current
wage
of $24,000 is not enough to
meet
the
rapidly
increasing
cost of living in Ann Arbor. In
fact, 80% of graduate workers
are rent-burdened, and many
of them are forced to live in
neighboring cities like Ypsilanti.
They live paycheck to paycheck,
struggling to afford groceries,
child care and medical bills.
They resort to rationing their
medications, skipping meals and
selling their plasma to keep their
heads above water. These living
conditions are indefensible. Yet,
the University is only offering a
raise of around $100 per month
in the first year and even less
in the next two years, which is
not enough to cover the yearly
6% inflation rate. In other
words, this “raise” is actually a
significant pay cut.
GEO’s demands also directly
benefit undergraduate students
on
campus.
For
example,
GEO is fighting for increased
disability
accommodations
and the creation of a Disability
Cultural Center. By providing
basic
training
on
disability
accommodations, GSIs can better
support undergraduate students
with disabilities. Another key
demand
includes
improving
access
to
gender-affirming
health care services. In the past,
GEO’s wins on gender-affirming
health care have led to better
coverage for everyone across our
campus community. At a time
when transgender people are
under assault across the country,
every person on campus has a
stake in GEO’s fight for trans
rights. For both undergraduate
and
graduate
students
who
are parents, GEO also hopes
to abolish the discriminatory
eligibility requirements for the
child care subsidy and increase
the subsidy to cover 75% of the
cost of U-M child care centers.
Another
central
aim
of
their platform is public safety
— something that will have
a big impact on the entire
campus
community.
Many
students of Color, graduates
and
undergraduates
alike,
have experienced traumatizing
encounters with campus police,
making
them
feel
alienated
and unsafe. GEO is asking
the University to fund the
Coalition
for
Re-Envisioning
Our Safety, which is developing
a
community-led
non-police
response program in Washtenaw
County. An unarmed program
was
voted
on
unanimously
by Ann Arbor City Council
and received 93% support in a
recent city of Ann Arbor poll.
GEO’s proposal to codify the
University’s sanctuary campus
policy, which would limit the
University’s cooperation with
immigration
enforcement
authorities except as required
by law, would also protect
undocumented students at all
levels of study. These common-
sense proposals would make the
University safer for everyone
and should be supported by the
entire campus community.
Last Thursday, the University
filed
an
injunction
against
GEO and is suing the union for
damages. The University claims
that GEO is causing “irreparable
injury”
to
undergraduates
by going on strike. However,
the
University
conveniently
ignores the fact that Central
Student Government, the largest
organization
that
represents
undergrads,
endorsed
GEO’s
demands last fall. Furthermore,
many of us will actually be
graduate workers ourselves one
day, meaning that the success of
GEO’s demands would directly
improve our lives in the near
future. In reality, it is the
University’s Board of Regents
and University President Santa
Ono who are responsible for
the disruption of GEO’s strike,
as they have permitted U-M
representatives
to
refuse
to
negotiate in good faith.
The punitive course of action
marked
by
the
University’s
injunction
is
an
aggressive
affront to the values that the
university claims to champion:
diversity, equity and inclusion.
The
University’s
commitment
to DEI seems hollow when U-M
administration is refusing to give
graduate workers a contract that
protects their most marginalized
members.
The
University
of
Michigan is one of the wealthiest
public institutions in the world.
Ono will receive $6 million in
salaries and bonuses over the next
five years. U-M administration
has
no
trouble
finding
the
money for multi-million dollar
renovations of the President’s
Mansion or millions of dollars
for former University President
Mark
Schlissel’s
retirement
package. Yet, when it comes to the
economic well-being of its grad
workers, the money seems to run
dry. The University needs to get
its priorities straight and spend
money on its students – not just
vanity projects and exorbitant
salaries for bosses.
I
ask
all
undergraduate
students to show some courage
and join graduate workers on the
picket lines. I ask them to not be
complicit in or support scab labor
— that is, labor that substitutes
that of striking workers. Don’t
attend your GSI sections if they
are being replaced by scabs and
don’t cross the picket line if
there is one in front of your class
building. Ask your professors to
commit to not using scab labor,
talk to your friends and classmates
about GEO’s fight, and sign up
for a picketing shift. If you are
financially able, donate to GEO’s
strike fund and share it widely.
Op-Ed: Why undergraduates
should be on the picket line
Wrong party
MAHNOOR IMRAN
Opinion Columnist
Design by Edith Hanlon
HELMUT PUFF
Elizabeth L. Eisenstein
Collegiate Professor of History
and Germanic Languages
and Literatures
Toward
a History
of Waiting:
Time, Space, and
the Social Hierarchy
A public lecture and reception; you may attend in person or virtually. For more information,
including the Zoom link, visit events.umich.edu/event/103674 or call 734.615.6667.
Wednesday, April 19, 2023 | 4:00 p.m. | Weiser Hall, 10th Floor
Quote card by Opinion