Following the Morning Ex “Journalism in Crisis” that “Weekly” staff members gave following a trip to the NSPA conference in Dallas, Texas, junior Adam Keim decided that it was time to develop the newest student publication for the school. “The Parker Bubble,” which has yet to be printed, will be distributed weekly and look like a mix between what “The Weekly” and “Phaedrus” look like. More than anything, the purpose of Keim’s paper is to reflect the ideas and feelings of the student body without, as he says, facing any censorship.

“The Weekly” wholeheartedly supports any and all responsible student publications. Because Parker stands as a embryonic democracy, the free exchange of ideas and speech is essential. Even though “Weekly” staff members work to cover a wide range of stories both taking place in the school and within the community, obviously there’s no way to cover it all. So the more publications increasing the number and type of interesting stories and news pieces that the student body can read, the better.

Because Keim wants to publish the perspectives that would, in his view, be censored in “The Weekly,” a number of students have told him that they would like to publish anonymous pieces. While Keim does not wish to print a paper completely comprised of anonymous pieces, he would consider publishing singular articles without named authors.

Beyond just “The Parker Bubble” and Keim’s stance towards anonymity, this is a conversation we often have with our staff members. If a writer comes forward with an anonymous source, regardless of how interesting or controversial the quote is, we have to cut it almost every time. There’s a fine line between protecting an individual that comes forward and maintaining credibility as a news source. In other words, our policy as a paper is that we will not public anonymous sources.

More than anything, our goal as a paper is to present as many voices and viewpoints as we can–from opposing views in news or feature articles to a varying range of opinion pieces, we want readers to walk away from each issue knowing that they read material that both affirms and contradicts their personal opinions.

We recognize that it’s easy to blame the administration regarding censorship and prior review. That being said, we want each and every one of our readers to know that the vast majority of our articles are not censored or reviewed by anyone other than our editors and our faculty advisor. We are by no means, as supporters of Keim have suggested, a publicity tool for the school– rather, we recognize that it is our job as a paper to serve as a “watchdog” for the administration.  And often they let us.

In each issue readers will find both positive and negative feedback on the running of the school– and that’s exactly what we think a paper should be: a place where readers can find the widest range of voices as possible. Yes, we do go to a private school where the administration can step in whenever they deem it necessary, but that does not mean we act as a publicity tool that serves only some narrow notion of their needs.

As the semester continues, we welcome more platforms in which ideas can be exchanged. That being said, we draw the line at anonymity. Especially today, when it seems every news source in the country is grappling with how to tell “true facts” and be as objective—or at least transparent—as possible, there’s next to no room for anonymity.