Staff Editorial: U. owes apology over edited photo

Can't Penn learn from other institutions' mistakes? When, in 2000, the University of Wisconsin admitted to digitally adding an African-American to a photo of all-white students at a football game for use in a brochure, no one thought that Penn would ever do anything like it. We were wrong.

With the revelation that the University digitally removed a rainbow tassel from a picture Arshad Hasan, who graduated from the College in 2003, that was featured on two 2004 commencement brochures, many may be asking why the alteration was made. There are several possible explanations as to why the tassel (which signified LGBT pride) was removed.

The University may have intended, as they claim, to make Hasan's appearance comply with official policy when depicted on the commencement materials. However, as has been pointed out, other insignia that also violated University regulations were left in the photograph. It is also possible that, as Hasan and others have alleged, there was a political motivation for removing a tassel that denoted gay pride.

But a third possibility is that the intent was neither to make the photo conform with University regulations nor to a particular political ideology. For example, someone may have simply decided that Hasan's photo looked better without the colored tassel and thus removed it, ignoring the significance to its wearer.

The truth may never be known, and "why?" may be the wrong question. Whether this was a political act on the part of the University or a simple mistake, the deletion of Hasan's rainbow tassel presents a error in judgment that, for two reasons, the University must work to correct.

This incident, coming as it does at a time in which gay rights have become a national issue, threatens to give the wrong impression about our university. Overall, Penn's record on gay rights has been a good one. It has long enforced non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and ten years ago Penn started providing benefits to same-sex partners of employees. In the wake of this instance, Penn needs to take action to restore its reputation.

More importantly, in editing Hasan's photo, the University abridged his freedom of speech. His decision to wear the tassel was clearly a form of speech, and while printed photographs are regularly touched-up to improve resolution and contrast, altering the content of photos for any reason changes the message that the subject of the picture is seeking to communicate. While the University had no obligation to feature Hasan's photo, once that decision was made, the University had an obligation to present him as he presented himself.

In addition to assurances that like instances will not occur again in the future, University administrators owe Hasan an apology that is both personal and public. Moreover, the administration owes an apology to the Penn community for acting in a way that misrepresents Penn's ethos. These apologies must be swift, they must be direct and they must be sincere. Only then can Hasan and the Penn community be assured that there was no political motive present, and only then can we all move on from this incident.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.