No comment

My mini-cassette recorder and reporting notepad were supposed to be put to good use Tuesday.

In light of the approaching one-year anniversary of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colo., my editor had assigned me an investigative article exploring the issue of safety in South Bend public schools. The plan of attack: visit some local schools and interview principals, security guards, students and parents.

But thanks to some tight-lipped administrators and a corporation-wide directive that discouraged them from speaking to the press in reference to Columbine, by 11 a.m., my article was a no-go.

One junior high principal had admonished me: "You reporters really ought to know better. It's not the right time to be talking about Littleton."

At the time, I was more disappointed that I wouldn't get my story than I was upset by her scolding. Now that I think about it, though, I'm a little ticked.

I mean, what's with the media bashing? Reporters ought to know better? Better than what? To pursue interesting, informative articles about matters that plague contemporary society?

Given the circumstances, readers likely have a strong desire — if not a right — to know the state of local schools. Certainly this is a context in which no news isn't good news.

After all, as family members of school-age children, aren't we put more at ease in knowing that our relatives will be secured behind locked doors come April 20? Won't we breathe somewhat easier on that terrible anniversary if we are aware of schools' security guards, surveillance cameras and other safety precautions?

The danger — and fear and hysteria — lies in not knowing about these lines of defense. And when it comes to leaving families in the dark as to the well being of their children, school administrators are the ones that ought to know better.

I wonder if those principals saw me cringe each time they justified withholding security information with the excuse that media attention prompts further incidents of school fatalities.

It's more than a little insulting that they think that any article I write would serve to perpetuate the violence and hatred that the Littleton massacre represented. As both a student journalist and an individual, I face many ethical questions and am subject to all sorts of moral responsibilities. I like to think that I place the value of human lives somewhere higher on the scale than a byline.

If I had seen my article as anything other than a means to inform and educate, I would have opted not to be a part of it. Note that my piece was never intended to be a celebration of Columbine but rather a look at how to keep from revisiting it.

And if now isn't the time to do that, when is? Two weeks, two days, two years from now? Or maybe when the two perpetrators and the body count they left have escaped our nation's collective consciousness.

If that's the case, South Bend schools need to realize that not discussing Littleton doesn't equal forgetting it. Truth is, "Columbine" and "Littleton" are haunting words that send chills up our spines whether or not they receive newspaper column inches.

• No comment