We try to permit a wide range of views in our pages, including those that do not represent the views of the paper-at-large. In such cases we usually confront them with countervailing voices. However, in the instance of our publication of the article “The Hollywood Witchhunt” in our November 2017 issue, by our Film Editor, we failed on behalf of our audience, our team and the article’s author to present a wider and fairer impression of the events in question. Our failure was principally made evident to us by our readers.
In particular, readers criticised the likening of claims of abuse in the article to censorship. While we believe the article’s intent was to draw attention to misinformation in the media and the importance with which serious allegations should be treated, we recognize that it may have missed the mark. We apologize that it appeared to be dismissive of or disrespectful to sexual assault victims.
This article was printed by itself in the Film section of the newspaper and was marked ‘OpEd’, rather than in the “Opinion and Debate” section where articles are often directly confronted on opposing pages. Certainly, its nature as an argumentative piece which does not represent the views of the paper-at-large should have been made more explicit by the editorial board. Its particular focus on a serious and contentious issue should have demanded even greater attention. As an uncontested opinion piece by a member of our team, therefore, we agree that the article gave an unfair impression of sexual misconduct allegations.
The Founder accepts its responsibility for the content it prints. Our future practice will reflect our commitment to producing an inclusive and quality independent journal, that remains receptive to the criticism of readers, on whom its future ultimately depends.