This week, The Globe’s point is responding to a letter to the editor written by David Rullo, a published author and senior staff writer at the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle.

While the same anxieties of its Point Park College days are gone, things are still not perfect here. That is true of any private university – COVID-19, enrollment cliffs and a dwindling college population have not helped matters. The situation has improved in recent years, but – in no uncertain terms – the pandemic struck a blow to our staffing numbers. To be candid, we did not have enough people on our editorial team.

Editors were too busy with writing and balancing several stories on a weekly news cycle due to a shortage of staff writers. For reference, in 1999, we had 10 editors, including the editor-in-chief and editor-elect, along with 22 listed staff members. Last semester, we had nine editors and eight listed staff members, who didn’t write every week.

With this, the errors Rullo pointed out were regretfully kept in the paper. While The Globe has offered an explanation, we are not handing out an excuse for sub-par work or bias.

Last semester, several pieces regarding the Palestinian territories were published in the paper. These include “Students for Change meets in Solidarity with Palestine” on Feb. 2, and “The Globe’s Point: We stand with Palestine” on Feb. 7. Rullo points out that both stories had AP style, terminology and factual errors. This is unacceptable. However, we would like to specify that Robert Ross, who represents the club, did not instruct any staff member or editor to write descriptors that he liked. Such would be unethical. The Globe would not bend to any person’s demands to modify a piece in such a way.

Rullo questions why no history professors were interviewed to give additional background on Ross’ statements. One-sided activism journalism and late submissions are something we are working to remove in our newsroom so that errors are caught and coverage in The Globe is not partisan. Being balanced, giving fair coverage and getting more sources per piece is a priority for us.

Ross has had works regarding the Israel/Gaza conflict published numerous times. Due to this, The Globe stands by its use of Ross as a source regarding the conflict. What earns someone the distinction to speak on the issue is ultimately subjective. Still, having a differing opinion does not automatically mean that someone else’s perspective is not worth considering.

Regarding “The Globe’s Point: We stand with Palestine,” a correction should have been published on all the errors, such as the misuse of the word “mass.” This was a recurring problem last year – even after learning of errors, a correction was rarely, if ever, given. Rest assured the editorial staff is aware of this issue and corrections will be given whenever necessary, either online or whenever possible in print from now on.

It is true that Hamas has rejected every proposed cease-fire ever since the October 7 attack and uses civilians as human shields. It is also true that Israeli forces have targeted humanitarian and civilian buildings within Gaza.

To be transparent, we are rethinking The Globe’s point – while displaying itself as an agreement between the whole editorial board, it has historically been the writing of one person without consulting the rest of our team. Instead, from now on, we want to give every editor a chance to write instead of only giving the space to the editor-in-chief or occasionally, the editor-elect. Our team is more than just the first in command.

We strongly condemn the atrocities that occurred in Israel on October 7. We also strongly condemn the deaths of innocent people in the Gaza strip that have no connection to Hamas. It is possible to be against anti-semitism and also be against the deaths of innocent people that are not being used as assets in war. The rise in anti-semitic attacks throughout the country, including here in Pittsburgh, is impossible to ignore.

The Globe was far from perfect last year, and it will never be perfect – no newspaper is. However, what we can promise is quality pieces devoid of the glaring errors that plagued our issues last year. We are proud of the improvements we have already made with our first three issues, and this trend will continue.