I am writing in response to The Gamecock’s news article, “Tracy Chooses Freshman as Chief of Staff” and the editorial, “Commission’s Inaction Results in Appointment.” I find both to be flawed in separate, yet equally important ways.
I will start with the editorial. You argue that the election commission’s inability to convict Kenny Tracy of an ethics violation ultimately resulted in Trenton Smith being named as chief of staff. This is a factually flawed assertion that is far beneath The Gamecock’s editorial board. To start, the elections commission did everything it could in regard to convicting Tracy of an ethics violation. It heard the original case, delivered its verdict and defended its verdict in front of the constitutional council. If you are unhappy with the fact that Tracy was found innocent, that is an issue to take with the constitutional council who overturned the decision, not the commission. The editorial ignores the fact that Tracy (technically, his staff) was found innocent. The editorial board has the right to comment on matters pertaining to the student body, not dismiss fact and use their column space to label someone as guilty. For this, I am deeply disappointed and would hope that an apology is issued.
Secondly, your news article, while well-written and well-investigated, never answers the simple question of, “Why should I care?” I can only assume that the point of the article was to shed light on the inner drama of Student Government (which we all know there is far too much of), in some attempt to develop a link between the staffing procedures of Tracy and the quality of service that his administration will be able to provide students. The only problem is that there is no such link.
I’ll start with the specific word of the headline, “freshman.” The purpose of chief of staff is two-fold: to serve as an adviser to the Student Body President, and to organize and manage an effective and efficient executive cabinet. Honestly, one’s class standing has absolutely nothing to do with their ability to execute either task. Instead, the qualities most necessary are the ability to communicate effectively, efficiently multi-task, simultaneously think short- and long-term and survive mostly on caffeine.
I know this because I, too, served as chief of staff as a freshman. I won’t deny that my appointment raised a few eyebrows, nor that I faced a steep learning curve. But at the end of the day, my peers respected my ability to serve them and the student body at large. This is what ultimately matters. Previous editors of your paper have felt no need to write on the topic, because they understood that wasting space on the staffing procedures of various student organizations served no journalistic purpose.
Smith is certainly one of the more impressive freshman I have seen come through SG in recent years, and nearly anyone with whom he has come into professional contact will agree. Tracy clearly trusts his judgment and believes that he will be able to handle the tasks ahead of him. That is the story — in two sentences.
Finally, I want to stress my disappointment with both parties. In my four years here at the University of South Carolina, I have seen both The Daily Gamecock and SG grow and strengthen as organizations, and I expected better from both. As the student body’s paper of record, I expect you to be able to identify worthwhile stories and not waste valuable time, energy and resources reporting on inconsequential issues. I also hope that SG can eventually stop with all this petty, in-house drama that seems to come up every year around this time, and get down to work on the issues that students care about.
— Alex Ott, fourth-year international business student and Student Government Executive Chief of Staff 2009–10 and 2010–11