The Outlook Leaks! Complaints about the Standard Replies
One person who complained about the article is angered by the fact that he/she is receiving a standard reply form the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief explains why she is sending standard replies.
Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 13:18:12 +0300
Subject: Re: Just another angry message
From: AUB Outlook
Thanks ————. I respect your criticism and you are entitled to that. I am
currently dealing with a lot of backlash, and yours is not the only insult
I have gotten. I just hope in a world full of homophobia, racism, and
sexism, we can all appreciate one obviously misinformed statement and turn
it into an educational opportunity.
I will address the accounts against me:
1. I have received over 40 emails concerning this article, and I have my
own studies to attend to (my mcat is in two weeks and I’m in the middle of
exams). Writing a personal email to each and every individual, when the
message is basically the same, is not feasible nor practical.
2. This writer represents a huge population of the arab world, and I hope
that this article will bring awareness of the miseducation occuring in our
own society. We can not only speak as an educated mass for that would be a
fallacy. To represent only one side of the situation would be unfair and
untruthful, which is why we will be publishing responses to this article in
the next issue, which I mentioned in my previous email.
3. Read above. I am not doing this for reasons of publicity but merely out
of fairness. Don’t read if you don’t want to.
4. We are human. We are students. We are volunteers. Mistakes happen, and
yes we are apologetic for them. Don’t expect us to catch everything when
you yourself would be unable to.
5. You are entitled to that opinion. My article last year should have been
edited (much like this one this year should have) and I apologized to the
AUB professor, who acknowledged and appreciated my apology. We published
the article again. No harm done.
6. Take that issue up with the writer.
——–, as a fellow AUB student I would ask you to reflect more kindly on
your peers. Mistakes happen and I am so sorry that they do. The world would
be a better place if we could only act more politely and apologize more
often, and if proofreaders really did their jobs correctly.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:53 AM, —————————— wrote:
> 1. When people are writing different -creative- comebacks, you might as
> well respect them and answer them properly, and not copy paste a reply to
> 2. There is no room for debate here. Enough is enough, and Homosexuality
> is out of the boundaries of being ethically discussed by a bunch of writers
> wanna-be. No one has the right to Ethically discuss this. It is whether we
> should build a bridge here or there. It is human nature, and it is medieval
> to be discussing it.
> 3. Write a response? Fire things up for little dead Outlook? “Fachar.”
> Your newspaper is dead, and I pity these lame attempts of getting people to
> read it. “Waiting for LGBT community at AUB to answer,” do you hear
> 4. Your job is only to edit grammar mistakes? Well you’re not even doing
> that. What if something is still talking about the USSR, would you not
> correct that? Do you not correct historical mistakes?
> 5. In my personal opinion, you are the worst Editor in Chief that Outlook
> has witnessed. I have read your stuff even from your days of “journalism.”
> Remember your “Great Geographical Finding?” Well you insulted a huge AUB
> professor, and now you have permitted the insult of a worldwide community.
> 6. I know this is not constructive criticism, but pardon me, the article
> itself was far from constructive.
> Be safe,
> Quoting AUB Outlook :
> Dear —————–,
>> We have been receiving several complaints on behalf of this article. It is
>> within every AUB student’s right to respond with a “Letter to the Editor”,
>> though I believe the LGBTQ community in AUB would like to issue a response
>> themselves, which we will be giving priority. Should you like to submit
>> your own reply (approx 300 words), please do so before sunday so we may
>> give it space within the layout.
>> The writer in question is responsible for his own views, and Outlook
>> maintains that every staff writer has the right to publish their own
>> viewpoints, which are not meant to be edited unless for grammatical and
>> stylistic error. As stated in our bylaws, we do not reflect any of our
>> staff writers viewpoints, and remain a secular, independent newspaper.
>> We will be publishing an errata about the comment on Russia’s jail cells,
>> as Russia legalized homosexuality in 1993.
>> Please let me know should you have any further questions.
>> Lojine Kamel
>> Outlook 2011-2012
>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:00 AM, ————————– wrote:
>> I am sure you are getting plenty of angry emails regarding the disgusting
>>> article recently published. I am cutting the formalities and the
>>> introductions to give you more time to read other emails.
>>> “Think before you write.” Never thought I’d have to say that to a whole
>>> Please don’t give us the “it’s a debate” argument. You don’t debate
>>> babies, you don’t debate the right to live. Homosexuality is out of the
>>> boundaries of debatable Ethics. It is not a toy-topic to be discussed,
>>> especially not by people likes those you’ve been getting to write.
>>> Find something else to fill your useless papers with, or simply shut
>>> Be safe,