Letters to the Editor

Interpretations, OWL and the Tory

Ere I had read six words of Katherine Reilly's editorial, I suspected that it was critically flawed. The title, "Tory resorts to poor journalism," reflects alarming ignorance from a Prince writer. Journalism as applied to writing is defined as impartial, expository reporting that offers facts and leaves interpretations to the reader. Journalism, then, is the theoretical role of The Daily Princetonian but is decidedly not the role of The Princeton Tory. I like to think of the Tory as similar to ABC's "This Week." First, we present the facts. Then, as Sam Donaldson always says, "We offer our strong opinions. And you can take them for whatever you think they're worth."

So, let's start with the facts. Contrary to Miss Reilly's statement, I did not "substitute pre-conceived biases for facts" in the May issue's review of the conference. When I attended the conference, I took voluminous notes and also recorded large portions of the conference on three hours' worth of tape. With these aids, I can effectively reconstruct the speeches – perhaps more completely than anyone save the speakers, but definitely more completely than Miss Reilly, could. I used these memory aids frequently and responsibly in the writing of my article. Contrary to Miss Reilly's allegation, I did indeed speak with some of the speakers after the presentations. Miss Reilly makes the hypocritical accusation that I did not adequately prepare for my article. It is she who needs to get her facts straight.

Next, the interpretation. When I said that a Managing Director of J.P. Morgan demonstrated "a minimal grasp of the proper use of statistics," I gave proof in the form of a statistic she cited. I then gave three reasons, each of which stands on its own, why the statistic was transparently irrelevant and irresponsibly used. To do so is not petulant insult; it is well-documented observation. Though Miss Reilly fails to mention it, I also voiced agreement with some of the panelists.

Incidentally, I did not know that this well-to-do MD and Princeton alumna was the mother of a Princeton student and OWL member, though I am not unduly surprised. I wish her a belated yet sincere happy Mother's Day.

An OWL member who attended the conference told me that she liked the well-written article; she did not perceive the arguments as mocking or the conclusion as pre-conceived. I stand by this piece as the product of thorough research and analysis.

I hope members of OWL will stop taking potshots at nonexistent Tory biases and recognize that a sincere and ideological dissatisfaction with their organization exists among many women and men at Princeton. Perhaps one day, we shall see the headline, "Princetonian Columnist Katherine Reilly Resorts to Journalism." John Andrews '05