Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor,

I am extremely disappointed about your handling of free speech rights in the Collegian’s editorial opinion pieces. The October 3, 2011 issue contains an editorial titled “The Numbing of the American Mind.” I must say, when I read that article, I was shocked at the language it used to describe religious belief. It is very clearly irresponsible, vitriolic anti-religious libel. Yet when Ms. Yevgeniya Lomakina published her opinion back in March 2011 on Planned Parenthood, you censored it and immediately fired her. Are you suppressing one opinion and favoring the other? Why protect the free speech of one writer and violate another writer’s?

As a junior who has lived on the UMass Campus for two full years, I had hoped that the liberal atmosphere of a state institution will protect students’ rights of free speech. Instead the Collegian engaged in biased censorship of opinion when they fired Ms. Lomakina and censored her opinion. State universities are famous for their “liberal” stances and many of their students proudly claim to celebrate diversity. Yet here in my own campus I find outright abridgment of a person’s right to exercise free speech. I respect all opinions, even when I disagree with them. And I will never ask you to censor another’s opinion. Even hypocrisy is allowed by freedom of speech.

I am not asking you to censor the October 3 editorial I mentioned. What I ask of you now is for you to address the damage of your conduct. We cannot have real freedom of speech on this campus unless all sides have their say, conservative or liberal, pro-life and pro-choice, atheist and religious. You have no right to suppress a person’s legitimate opinion. And if you claim to be a campus liberal, then act liberal and allow all of your columnists’ opinions to be read. I must also demand that you reinstate Ms. Lomakina to her post on the Collegian, and extend your apologies to her, then retract your apologies to the public for her article. What she did was not wrong. You have done a tremendous violation of her freedom of speech, and if you do nothing, your hypocrisy will be laid bare for all to see.

Respectfully,

Harry Chandra Suwanto

 

————————————————————–

Dear Editor,

My last letter to you had been very extreme. Let me begin by saying that I am disappointed in the editor who decided to fire Ms. Lomakina from her position. I wasn’t specifically directing that criticism at you, but I was unaware at the time of writing about your position. I apologize if it seemed to you that I had been, in any way, blaming you for that mistaken decision.

Aside from that, however, I must stand firm in my opinion of the matter. Mr. Walsh, for his part, wrote in his editorial about how “…religion-among other concepts-pull a veil over the faces of the masses, and completely dilute their brain’s capacity to think freely.” I strongly object to this statement chiefly because I have seen many of my own friends and relatives who are religious. They are very intelligent people and are not blinded by dogma. My own father was-and still is-a religious man when he attended university and graduated with a doctorate in microbiology. By saying that religion dilute brains, Mr. Walsh is implying-and generalizing-that ALL religious people are either addled or unintelligent. This is why his opinion struck me as libel.

Regarding Ms. Lomakina, and regardless of your own position on sexuality and Planned Parenthood, she should have had at least a chance to clarify her opinion and explain herself. An opinion is certainly going to be subjective, but I cannot decide whether what she wrote was libel against Planned Parenthood or, as one commentator on the Collegian website put it, “misogyny.” But she definitely deserved a chance to clear up the matter and have further say. Please consider allowing her this opportunity, if not to regain her position in the Collegian, simply to rehabilitate her own name.

However, regarding your offer for me to write an article on the matter, I must sincerely decline. I am neither a law student nor a Journalism major, and as such I think it best to leave the writing of articles to professionals such as yourself.

Finally, you informed me in your reply that my letter to you will be published. If so, please include this message as well, as a “part 2” of that letter. I am afraid that if this second part does not accompany my previous opinion, there will be uproar all over the campus and town. Perhaps I’m exaggerating, but I never know what will happen.

Respectfully,

Harry Chandra Suwanto

 

View Comments (3)
More to Discover

Comments (3)

All Massachusetts Daily Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • T

    Teresia FrechetteJan 6, 2012 at 6:57 am

    great info. thanks for sharing. Destin Condo

    Reply
  • H

    How to write a book reviewNov 12, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    I really apprecite the information.

    Reply
  • A

    Anon111Oct 9, 2011 at 12:10 am

    Personally, I found Walsh’s article to be rather tame compared to Lomakina’s article. I think Walsh brings up a valid criticism of religious fundamentalism that is worth close examination, although I believe he takes a misstep in logic in making a too broad of a generalization of grouping anyone who is religious as incapable of thinking critically. Let’s face it, there may or may not be a God, heaven, a state of nirvana, etc. But literal interpretations of biblical stories, passages in the Quran, etc are mostly wacky and unfounded. There are too many Americans, for example, that believe Adam and Eve actually existed, or that organisms were intelligently designed. It is incredulous that a subset of these personal beliefs are hotly debated issues among school board administrators. I believe the soul of Walsh’s article is partly to capture that hopeless irrationality that has deeper roots in religious fundamentalism.

    Reply