Summary of what happened: Journalists took pictures of protesters and used their photos to track them down in the directory to ask for an interview. The paper later apologized for their actions.

What you would say to one of the journalists there on staff or to the staff as a whole?

Overall, I don’t believe that the paper did anything unconstitutional or unethical — thus, no apology is needed. The students were going to the protest to do one thing: protest. The very definition of protest is, “a statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something.” The students knew that they were going to be seen, and thus recognized. And the paper called and asked politely for an interview and accepted the students response, whether it was yes or no.

Or what would you have written in that letter to the readers instead of what was written?

I wouldn’t have written a letter, to be quite frank. There was no need for an apology; and if anyone thought otherwise I would kindly direct them to this blog post and the US Constitution.

I read The Student Vote is Surging. So are the Efforts to Suppress it by The New York Times and was quite intrigued by what I read. I approved on how Austin Community College tapped its own funds to give students a chance to vote early, but the fact that they don’t stay open for the 12 day period could be seen as cumbersome. I understand the Republicans viewpoint as to why they would want to limit students chances to vote, since they are outstandingly Democratic, but I do tend to sway with some of their theology. For instance, how Wisconsin Republicans are not allowing students to use their student IDs as identification. Personally, I believe nationwide you should present your drivers license when going to vote.