Sioux City Journal devotes entire front page to bullying editorial

Devil, none of us live in your world, much less your country.

 

I don't see how you can, or should, spend an entire front page on one editorial -- particularly without any news or related factual stories or sidebars along with it.

It smacks of screaming, in-your-face pontificating, and topic-de-jour-ism, not necessarily the strong, principled stand that the paper intends.

Besides that point, and not to defend whatever harassment this boy endured, but he probably did not kill himself strictly because of the bullying. I would question whether we can be certain that that is even necessarily what sent him over the edge.

As others have said, bullying has been around forever, it tends to wax and wane, and I'm not sure how much "public education" people need in order to know right from wrong and that they shouldn't do it.

Editorials like this -- particularly when done en masse and the stand to take is rather obvious and unanimous -- may, unfortunately, actually bring excessive and unwanted attention. I wonder if this type of thing might even cause people to do exactly what you intend and hope for and encourage them not to do.

 

My point

















































Your head

 

I taught for 16 years, and I can tell you it's not always gay kids.

Yes, a lot of times it is, but there's bullying going on out there against anyone who is somehow "different."

 

While I agree with the sentiments, and the idea it was gutsy, I do not believe the front page is the place for an editorial.

This would have worked fine on the front of the opinion section.

I would even say refer it.

 

This is what leapt out at me. An editorial decrying bullying? Doesn't strike me as "gutsy." The whole thing strikes me as a gimmick. It would have been more palatable packaged with some real news.

 

Coming tomorrow: Our plea for world peace

 

The only way this would have been as edgy or as gutsy as the editors think they were, would be if the editorial had come out in favor of bullying.

Future hard-hitting, front-page editorials against:

* Crime
* Pollution
* Drugs
* Racism

... etc.

 

Thoughts on this one?

 

Couple of thoughts come to mind:

1) After the Patriot-News did their front-pager on Paterno and the Penn State situation, did some publishers have the "we should do one of these too" seeds planted in their head?
2) Although it's been said, many times, many ways already on this thread, I'll throw it out again: Bullying seems to be the "flavor of the day" when it comes to pop culture causes. It's even gotten the "South Park" treatment within the last couple of weeks. Last month it was Kony, next month, what, graduation prayers?

(Edit: Written before, but posted after, psuedo's post).

 

Where was all this outrage 35 years ago? I guarantee you bullying was just as real back then.

 

Absolutely.

This was boring and pointless and stupid and self-centered. This was an attempt to take a stand against something that everyone is already against. No one is pro-bullying. There were plenty of people on the other side of The Patriot-News' editorial. That's what made it effective. This is just an attempt to say "The newspaper cares," and to draw a little national attention, at least from journalists, for a bullshit PR move that doesn't represent the day's news at all.

And, before anyone goes, "Well, I bet the single-edition sales were way up to justify it," let's hear the numbers. Because I'm betting most people rolled their eyes.

This effort diminishes the actual impact of the front-page editorial.