Thanks for your response to our news story. We appreciate how you have underscored Dean Wilson's commitment to teaching and to the University.
We feel, however, that you fail to make a clear distinction between "the article" and what someone is cited as saying in the article.
For instance, you say that "the article challenged his fundraising experience [and] scholarly credentials."
Not exactly: Someone is quoted in the article as stating that. The Campus Echo took no position on this or any other matter regarding Dean Wilson's qualifications.
Elsewhere you state that "the article alleges that he is simple unqualified for the job."
Not exactly: The article — or the Echo as you seem to imply — doesn't allege any such thing. Someone cited in the article makes that point.
Additionally, you express concern that the story "failed to take note of his teaching skills ..." Duly noted, but we didn't examine the teaching skills of any of the candidates in the story.
This is largely because the focus of the story was on questions raised by some about the selection process itself, not the qualifications of any single candidate.































is a member of the 



Be the first to comment on this article! Log in to Comment
You must be logged in to comment on an article. Not already a member? Register now