In regards to the October 9 article “Grade-point average causes job termination” by Septembre Russell regarding the termination of a music coordinator by ASLC representatives, I found the writing in general extremely biased and offensive to the representatives — in particular LAB vice president of programming Nicole Bond. Throughout the article Bond is continually harassed about the termination of Alyssa Hood, as if she personally was responsible for Hood’s termination and hardship. By the end of the second page, the author’s writing goes from slightly journalistic in style, to blatantly spiteful “she said/she said” writing. Reading the article in its entirety was painful: I felt as if I was reading a note some catty 15 year old would pass in class, not a college newspaper.
Journalism is supposed to be as unbiased as possible, and this piececlearly fails to meet that requirement.
Secondly, the very content of the article isn’t suitable for print, let alone a prime spot on the front page that could have been taken up by a worthwhile story regarding an issue pertinent to Linfield students. Clearly, this article was inspired by a bitter former employee, desperate to make someone pay for her own lack of ability to meet job requirements. The matter should have been settled between Hood and ASLC representatives, rather than shoved at the student population in hopes that…what? There would be a public outcry for Ms. Hood’s job to be returned? Sorry guys, The only action this article should inspire is an apology from Hood and Russell to Bond for all the mudslinging done throughout.
The Linfield Review has been a respectable college newspaper in the past, and everyone on staff has big shoes to fill. One sincerely hopes that this sort of article is an isolated mistake that will not be tolerated or repeated in the future.

-Shauna Litts, junior