I challenge the News Tribune to explain what possible good could have come from publishing the article on Page 2 of the Dec. 10 issue, headlined, "UMD star convicted of sex crime in 2007."
For some reason that surely was not the public good the newspaper chose to recount the fact that a young man who had made a mistake and admitted to it was a student at the University of Minnesota Duluth and a valued member of its football team. Apparently the university knew of the man's past and chose to give him a chance to build a new life. He admitted to his crime and accepted the punishment the court believed was reasonable.
I believe our society's hope is that once an individual is convicted and serves his sentence he will reorganize his life and become a valued member of our society. It appears to me that is exactly what the young man, with the help of the university, was trying to do.
Please tell me how the article contributed to his endeavors. Was there really a public good that was served by exposing his past? I doubt it. Perhaps it would be prudent for the News Tribune to ask, "Why was it necessary or proper for us to inform the public of this matter?"
If an article has the potential to do more harm than good, perhaps it should not be printed. In this matter, I believe that more harm than good will be the result.
ADVERTISEMENT
I apologize to the young man for the knowledge that I gained of his early life -- and that is none of my business. I wish him well in his career.
Phili H. Nast
Duluth
