Did you ever look through your high school annual and note that — by sheer coincidence — most of the candid photos featured members of the yearbook staff and their friends?

Perhaps something similar recently occurred at Vassar College.

As reported by The College Fix, there was a bit of hubbub earlier in the year over U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson.

Jeh had been scheduled to speak at this spring’s commencement but officially pulled out on Valentine’s Day.

More from the Fix:

[A February 17th article in The Miscellany News] detailed the decision…Johnson made to withdraw… …

Johnson, who is black, was accused by some students of committing “war crimes” for enforcing immigration laws on the U.S. southern border.

Calling immigration a “difficult and painful issue,” Johnson, who served during the second Obama administration, withdrew as a speaker…

That’s all well and good, but the February article itself was criminally problematic: It quoted too many white people.

Hence, the piece was wholly pulled.

On March 23rd, the paper’s editors launched a massive mea culpa.

[T]he online version of the article has been pulled…by the Executive Board in concert with the News Editors. We would like to take this space to discuss the reasoning behind our decision and recognize the feelings of disappointment and hurt surrounding the article’s publication.

The crew made clear the story was rushed, as Jeh canceled close to press time.

Concerning Caucasian corruption:

[W]e attempted to include a variety of quotes from students describing why there was protest to the announcement of him as speaker in the first place, and the students’ reaction to his withdrawal.

“In prioritizing urgency over thoroughness,” the publication “made misguided and insensitive oversights with whom [it was] representing in the article and failed to provide in-depth reporting of the issue at large.”

The “at large” part is a matter of melanin:

The majority of our quotations came from white students, and therefore we reduced the positions of students of color to a singular, tokenized perspective.

It typifies America’s racism. Or at least the editors’:

Our article exemplifies many of the institutional flaws and structural problems within our paper. Journalism, including college journalism, has historically been a white-centric, often elitist field, and The Miscellany News is not immune to the consequences of these structures.

How could they have knowingly unknowingly been racist because of a history of racism in the press? Such isn’t spelled out.

But it was definitely dastardly:

The publication of the article and its subsequent removal reminds us of the systemic issues our members are implicated in, as well as the privilege and lack of diversity that we have allowed to persist for generations across our boards. None of our explanations for the failures of an individual article can mitigate the problem of past coverage on issues related to people of color, nor address in full depth the issue of representation within our board.

The editors concede that “consistent action must be taken in order to address the systemic problems within The Miscellany News.”

To admit there are “systemic” issues, as I understand, is to say they’ve discovered overly racist mechanisms embedded into the outlet. Simply pinpointing and immediately removing them would seem the obvious response.

Or they could form a committee:

[W]e will work to take both immediate and gradual steps. One of these steps includes our current process of making a review board that aims to examine quotes and sources to ensure both their veracity and the integrity of their representation within the article. The review board will be separate from the editorial board, and its members will view articles on a rotational basis.

The editors took tremendous time composing their confession so as to “cover the gravity or complexity of the situation.”

The article was removed to “prevent further harm among the communities [they] misrepresented.”

In a rush, might they not have reached out broadly enough? Did one lone white writer only survey his or her small circle of pale pals? If so, why wasn’t the web article simply supplemented with less white words?

Perhaps it’s because these are the days of epic apologies. Rather than correcting an error, it’s more en vogue to run from town while shouting “Unclean!”

But maybe I’m wrong.

Either way, for those being quoted in any future Vassar article, make sure a bunch of nonwhites are interviewed. Otherwise, you may never see your name in print.

-ALEX

See more content from me:

University Drops a Bomb: There Will Be No More ‘Office of Equity and Inclusion’

College Students Hold a ‘Die-In’ to Protest Their Own Freedom to Unmask

University Puts Freshmen Through ‘Equity’ Orientation, Schools Them on ‘Whitesplaining’

Find all my RedState work here.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.