Transcript: Podcast with Raquel Coronell Uribe, of the Harvard Crimson

'This is who you are.' A student editor on the enduring appeal of journalism.

The Harvard Crimson’s office, on Plympton Street in Cambridge. (Courtesy of The Crimson / photo by Julian J. Giordano.)

In an accompanying post, I present a podcast interview with Raquel Coronell Uribe, a Harvard senior who is the president of the student newspaper The Crimson, plus some excerpts from our discussion.

Here is a full version. I offer it as a rough-and-ready auto-transcription from Otter.ai. Otter is great but not perfect. You’ll see some mixed-up punctuation and other jumble, which I’m not taking the time to line-edit. I mean this mainly as a guide — it’s a way to scan the topics. If there is anything that is interesting, or confusing, I recommend that you consult the podcast itself, which is below. The time markers in the transcript should match the podcast.

---

The discussion:

James Fallows

Raquel, it's a real pleasure to talk with you. Would you say a word about the building in which we are meeting and why we are meeting here today?

Raquel Coronell Uribe 00:10

Absolutely. Yes. It's a pleasure to be with you. So 14 Plympton Street is where the Harvard Crimson is based. This is our building and where we produce every night. We, you know, are the Harvard student newspaper, but we're totally independent from Harvard financially. And editorially, we've been around for 149 years coming up on 150.

I'm the current president, and not so long ago, you were the president. So, you know, you're my predecessor. And we've tried to carry on your tradition of just editorial and a free student press.

Fallows 00:48

And as you were gracious in your phrasing, I'm your predecessor--53 years removed. So back in 1969 1970, I was the president of the Crimson. And it was just a delight and an honor to see the tradition being carried on so well by you.

How, briefly, did you end up from wherever you started out in life to 14 Plympton Street and Cambridge? Just remind us of what took you from Bogota, to, to Cambridge.

Coronell 01:26

So I was born in Bogota, Colombia, and I lived there for until I was 12-13.

Although somewhere in the middle, we did an impromptu kind of move to California, because both my parents are journalists. And my dad's work as a journalist at the time when I was around six years old, put a target on his back, and really all of our backs, because, you know, powerful people didn't like the reporting that he was doing and what he was finding.

With the help us Committee to Protect Journalists, and the Knight Foundation, and Stanford, overnight, we pretty much packed up our life in a couple of suitcases and flew to San Francisco. And we were in the Bay Area for two years, while things calmed down a little bit.

Long story short, I ended up in Miami afterwards and got the opportunity to come here as a student at Harvard. And it took me a little bit to get to the Crimson. I didn't join until my sophomore year. But I always read the Crimson and I knew that I had to be a part of it. And as soon as I walked through these doors, it just felt the energy of the newsroom of people bustling to get the paper out, to write their articles, to edit, I knew that this was my new home. So I dove into the paper.

Fallows 02:49

I'm glad you did. I'm glad to hear that. When I was at the Crimson in the late 1960s, having started on the business board selling ads, because I wanted to save money to go to medical school, as I thought I was going to do.

There was the same excitement, then about journalism and all the turmoil of those times, which were in a way even more tumultuous than now. Journalism was seen as a more sort of "normal" career path or career option for people at Ivy League schools or with elite educations. These days, how do you consider journalism as something to spend your undergraduate time on your colleagues on the Crimson, at a time when journalism is in such trouble economically and civically, what has drawn your colleagues in the paper,

Coronell 03:37

I think that the thing has drawn us to the Crimson is really the same thing that would, you know, draw us to journalism later on.

But I think there's no kind of context or place in which it's more clear about the value of a free student press or a free press than at Harvard. And I think that the ability to hold decision makers accountable to you know, hold the university president the Deans accountable, to keep an eye on what they're doing, to report it. And, frankly, to get the pushback that we do from reporting it is, I think, what excites us all to be here and what keeps us going and what keeps us here until I've seen hours of the night, putting together the paper.

Because I think that, you know, as students, we're stakeholders and kind of the decisions that go on here, and the ability to to figure those out, ahead of time sometimes, to figure out what Harvard has to say about the decisions that it makes both within the country you know, like the the things that it invests in, in its endowment in for example, or even public policies or things like that are hugely important to us and to all of our peers. So being able to record that and hold them accountable, I think, is what really draws people to the Crimson

Fallows 04:54

What would have been one or two of the big issues on which the Crimson has had had to take a stand during during your time here. Back when I was here it was things like the policy on ROTC and the bust of University Hall. What have been moments you think of where the Crimson and its independence were coming into disagreement or misalignment with the university and its policies?

Coronell 05:26

A great question. I mean, I think one story that comes to mind, this is from our news side, but one story that comes to mind is one that one of our reporters did recently on the Kennedy School and kind of what happened with its financial aid office and how it left students scrambling.

And, you know, I think that was a very much a story that he had to dig for, and that he had to that reporter's name is Miles Herszenhorn , he had to really dig for that story and and find it.

And I think that HKS students were, you know, grateful to see their views represented in a way that maybe the school hadn't really spoken out about. And a few weeks later, coincidentally, or perhaps not, so coincidentally, the Dean of HKS came out and apologized for what had happened with the office. So I think that is an example of kind of the the causal effects that our reporting can can have sometimes.

Fallows 06:23

Based on the experience, you and your colleagues have had, you know, day after day, late into the night and the paper, what would you bet 10 years from now, what proportion of them will be in some form of journalistic activity?

Coronell 06:35

I think the majority of them, I think, you know, I don't think that we all know exactly what it is we want to do. But I would be shocked, if you know, the majority of us more than half at least, aren't doing journalism in the future, because I think that the way that my dad puts it in, and that I agree with is that journalism is a little bit like a bug. Once it bites you it like you're done. That's who you are, if you like it, you will be like infected with want to do it in some form or another for the rest of your life.

Fallows 07:15

Number one. That is well put. Number two, I agree. So congratulations.

Let me ask you about another theme. I have not been on universities for a very long time, I've spent my time in the journalism business. Something that one always reads about university life now involves constraints on freedom of discussion and free debate, etc. And every week, when you pick up the New York Times, or some news story about limits on campus discussion, how do you see that as somebody who is leading one of the sort of main implements of discussion and free debate on the most famous campus in the US? How what should people outside the academy think about the state of free debate within the academy now?

Coronell 07:59

Yeah, I think what I can weigh in on, you know, more specifically, is the state of that debate within our newspaper. And so that would be within our editorial pages, for example. And I, you know, what, say that I have been so privileged to get to know a group of people, the editorial board that is incredibly thoughtful, and it's debate, it's respectful. It welcomes people from different views and welcomes those views, to form nuanced takes and nuanced opinions on the things that we pine on it, those things are not always or sometimes not ever popular.

But I think, to the credit of the editorial board, you know, and I think they've shown this, especially during my tenure is just the willingness to publish op eds, letters to the editors and dissenting takes on their their views in even when those takes, you know, really are quite critical of the editorial board. There's no room in the debate for ego or for kind of, you know, refusing to publish something because it's insulting or it's critical or anything like that. I think they, you know, really prioritize making sure that their purpose as a board is to serve as a springboard for debate debate, and to really kind of cultivate that dialogue on campus and to continue that conversation in our pages from other people. So what I would say is that, I think that what I would want people to know is that I think that debate on campus is something that is welcome. And, and that you know, that's that's,

Fallows 09:47

Is there ever an occasion where people say, Gee, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, I bet our counterparts could have made X or Y or Z argument, but we can't do that now because we're afraid to step on toes, which is the impression you get from most coverage of elite universities these days, but does that kind of feeling ever come up?

Coronell 10:08

I'm sure it does for you know, individuals and people here and there, but it's not something that I have ever heard, you know, the board editorial board express or a large group of people in our newspaper express.

And I think actually, the Crimson has served as a venue for people who one might think would feel that way to have their opinions published and their pieces published, you know, within reason, obviously, we're, we have editorial standards, and we enforce those but those pieces are published. And I think that goes to show that, you know, our willingness to engage in debate and to cultivate that debate, and to make sure that it is a part of campus life and a part of, you know, journalism's life.

Fallows 11:00

One of the areas, which you and I have discussed over the past year was was the controversy on campus, about the Crimson publishing an editorial endorsing a BDS strategy for Harvard. What should the outside world know about the Crimsons decision to publish that editorial, and the blowback the Crimson received?

Coronell 11:27

With all editorials what the editorial board does is published the majority view of the board. So there are meetings, there are three meetings per week, in which a topic is posed and discussed and then voted on. And, you know, people should know that this was the the majority view of the board.

I was present at the debate, it was a respectful one, in which no sort of, you know, objectionable or ad hominem attacks or anything like that was was made. It was a debate based on you before every debate, there is a reading list people must do in order to to a pine. So there are stories and articles from all sorts of publications, from the New York Times to Crimson articles. So I believe people were informed when they voted and made this decision.

And, you know, I think I would say that they were aware as well that it would be an emotional topic to engage with, and one that many people would disagree with. But they still felt that it was worthwhile. At the time, this, this came on the heels of Israel apartheid week, which is a programming that happens on campus are hosted by the Palestinian solidarity committee. And what the board does is opine on topics that, you know, have recently happened on campus or things that are relevant. So that was a reason that it was, you know, relevant in that moment to opine on it. And, and they felt that, despite the fact that it would be an unpopular opinion with many, and that it would be one that would overturn precedent, that it was one that was worthwhile, and they felt that they, you know, had to speak on.

And since then, I've been, you know, really proud of the board, because of the way that they have handled, you know, responses is to publish all nearly all of the letters that have come in disagreeing with them. And I think that really does paint a view of how fraught this debate and the topic is, and I think it has given a platform to both sides or to all sides to really have their say.

Fallows 13:43

To clarify, for those who don't know the workings of the Harvard Crimson, the editorial board is different from the editors of the paper. Would you explain that distinction?

Coronell 13:52

Absolutely. Yeah, so so so we have 10 boards across our papers. And one of those boards is the editorial board. And we have what's called news-ed divide, a news-ed wall. And we also have a news-biz wall and an ed-biz wall, which basically means that the people on the editorial board are only on the editorial board, they don't cover any of the topics on the new side. And they also don't make any of the business decisions that the Crimson does.

So if you're on the editorial board, essentially, you are limited to attending the meetings to helping write the editorials into writing, you know, op eds or columns if you so choose. And that ensures that we have fair impartial coverage of all topics on campus and also that we don't have any business decisions that are in any way influenced by our editorial decisions that the editorial board makes. And I think that's important to note because, you know, we we don't ask our other editors what their opinions are on the editorial side become discussed because it's not, you know, part of their role. And the editorial board really only seeks to represent the majority view of the editorial board. And in that sense, it serves as a springboard for debate on campus.

Fallows 15:08

And this structure is more or less the one, The New York Times Washington Post, the LA Times, even the Wall Street Journal have. I save "even" because of their editorial board. But they all have their news operation is different from their editorial operation.

It's a little different from the structure when I was in your job long ago, but had a sort of similar effect. The President, you know, Editor in Chief of the paper did not really was not really in charge of editorials. And so that is useful for people to know.

And also, as you and I have discussed, I think most alumni, including me, were proud of the independence that the Crimson showed, and I believe that's been the main view from alumni of just thinking that is this a publication that is up to the students to decide, you know, what they were that they should say.

So let me ask you about one other development in the Crimsons long history between my era and yours. The very first night I was in the newsroom, there was a single sheet and press while they had these giant sheets of paper, they were fed in one by one for the printing, then there became the press that I think you still have downstairs. But the Crimson is in the middle of an evolution from a print first operation to something else. So could you describe the process of Crimson how a historic college newspaper has decided to bridge the print and digital divide?

Coronell 16:43

it will answer Yeah. Yeah. So I think that it's a very, it's a debate, I mean, so it's a decision that was not taken lightly at all. And I think that we wanted to make sure that no matter what we did, we would remain, you know, the oldest continuously published college daily, and I think it's just a matter of what form that daily takes.

I think that, you know, my colleagues and I, we, we all see the value of print, and how important it is to kind of have that physical paper to hold in your hands, and both from just a journalistic perspective, and you get to present content in a way that you don't otherwise.

And also just the nostalgia historical value. And I think one of the reasons people joined the Crimson is because of that. So so I guess I'll just preface that discussion with that.

But but it was a decision that was many months, years in the making, and it involved, you know, undergraduates, and it involved alumni, and it involved, you know, experts in journalism, such as you, you were, you know, a big voice and very helpful in making this decision.

And I think what it came down to was that people really are not reading the print newspaper anymore. When you looked at the pickup rates, it was less than a third of students who were really picking up the papers on a daily basis. But at the same time, as you also know, I'm sure putting together a paper takes the entire day, and then some. And it just was a question of where of how we wanted to engage with our readers and what kind of content we wanted to give them and where to put our sites.

Because while we have less than a third of pickup rate for the print newspaper, we also have over 30 million yearly views on our website. So I think it just became a question of, clearly our website is what is most frequented. So we should make sure that we are prioritizing that, while at the same time we are optimizing the newspaper and we are able to give our readers a very unique almost luxury readership experience, reimagining that paper and if that means doing so less frequently, I think that is without doubt the correct answer.

Fallows 19:01

And I will leave it to you at the proper time to announce exactly how those will be done. But every publication including the Atlantic where I worked for many years, and the oldest magazine has tried to balance its print and online presence. Everybody else is doing this.

Let's go into one particular aspect of your printed online balance, which is the inflexible deadline of a daily print paper sort of shaped the whole rhythm of the day, you know, by 5pm, certain things had to be done by 8pm. Certain things had to be done in at 2am or whenever the presses had to roll. And that rhythm and inescapability of deadlines was part of a journalist's conditioning and the teamwork that went into it. So how can you -- what's the way that you recreate some of the good parts of that deadline consciousness in a 24/7 Publishing cycle?

Raquel Coronell Uribe 19:56

It's interesting because I think that really what made the decision And so clear to us are and what made the rhythm at which we were working impossible was that we were working with those inflexible print deadlines. But we were also working with online deadlines.

So we basically had, you know, twice the deadlines and the same amount of time in the day. So I think that just by nature of a college newspaper, we will still have those deadlines. I mean, we will still we still plan to publish every single day.

And I think actually, what this creates is a more rigorous deadline structure. Because, you know, if news breaks at 2pm, and you have until you know, 4am, to post that news to get it up, now, you actually do not have that cushion, that 12 hour cushion until it has to be written for the presses, you have to have it up almost immediately, in order to be relevant to readers, you know, you really have to make sure you're informing people in real time. And I think being able to focus on online more than we had before, it kind of allows us to follow that deadline structure in which we are trying to get the news up as soon as it happens.

And also, I think there's a question of timeliness. And if you publish Tuesday's news on Friday, well, you know that that's no longer relevant to readers in the same way it would be on on the same Tuesday.

Fallows 21:24

I’d like to ask you just one other question. What's the main thing that's a reality of your life as the first Latina woman, president of the Harvard Crimson, at the helm of this historic newspaper? What's the main thing about your life and responsibilities that you think people don't understand? Or they'd be surprised to know about your daily life here?

Coronell 21:55

Oh, that's a good question. I think people may not know that I'm more or less live here.

James Fallows 22:13

[Laughs] I know that! Why do you think I lived in Adams House? It's like 20 feet away from the paper.

Raquel Coronell Uribe 22:19

I wish I was in Adams. And I'm more or less live here. And I think from from the moment I wake up to the moment I go to bed, I'm doing Crimson work.

And for me, as President, I kind of have a hand in all things. And that's anything from if there's a leak in the roof, I have to make sure that we're taking care of it to you know, an hypersensitive story or something like that, making sure that we are reviewing it to make sure that our reporting is, you know, legal, ethical, and, you know, all of the standards that we impose upon that.

So I think I think that that is one thing. My roommate jokes that you know, she she has never seen me less than then when I, you know, became became a part of the Crimson and jokes that my new roommates are all Crimson editors.

Fallows 23:11

We did not prepare this question at all. But I'll say there's nothing you could possibly have said, that would more reassure me about the current management of the Crimson or more suggest continuity over the eons.

So Raquel, thank you very much for taking this time to talk. Congratulations on what you're doing and to all of your colleagues and the next stages for the .

Coronell 23:32

Thank you so much. That means the world to me. Thank you.