To the Editor,
After Rachel Pastan, the editor of The Swarthmorean, and Satya Nelms, the associated editor, resigned last week from this paper, the publishers wrote that the resignations resulted from a misunderstanding, on Satya and Rachel’s parts, of the request for a different “editorial balance.”
There are at least two critical matters at stake, as I see it. The first concerns what it means when white people ask Black women and their allies to take a break from speaking out and writing about racial injustice. The language of “editorial balance” appears to stand in for a degree of unease about the way that articles about race relations here in Swarthmore call out the failures of well-intentioned white people. Many members of our community, including the publishers, are deeply and admirably invested in efforts to revitalize and promote equity in the city of Chester. Yet I am left to wonder whether Rachel and Satya’s attention to racism in our own backyards elicited a degree of discomfort that outreach to Chester does not.
Second, all signs indicate that Rachel and Satya understood perfectly what was asked of them. The publishers erred not only by not explaining in their letter their reasons for requiring these changes to the paper — or the extent of any community interest in changing the paper’s emphasis — but also by publicly implying that Rachel and Satya’s actions were anything other than thoughtful and principled. Editors and publishers often disagree about a publication’s focus and vision. But rather than explain these differences, the publishers in their letter suggested that not only confusion but a quest for social media notoriety motivated these resignations. The letter demonstrated a troubling lack of respect for both Rachel and Satya.
I offer this comment from a place of empathy. Several years ago, I learned that my good intentions caused several individuals pain because I failed to account for the racist context that surrounded my words and actions. Friends cared enough to call me out on my ignorance. At first angry, and quickly mortified, I listened, read, and have tried ever since to do better. With all that we have now lost, I sincerely hope that the publishers and their vocal defenders will take a moment to consider the possibility that they are not faultless. None of us is. Conflict and crisis can bring opportunities to learn and change, so long as we are willing to listen with humility to those who try to teach us.
I am among the many readers of The Swarthmorean who thought that the paper had never been better than it was after Rachel first took over as editor, and even more so during the last eight months when she and Satya together cultivated a nuanced editorial vision. I am glad we have three more weeks of issues edited by Rachel before her contract expires. I will miss seeing their work here, and I have canceled my subscription.
Rebecca Davis
Swarthmore
