A Teachable Moment for Campus Journalism

By William McNally, Professor of Finance and Co-Director of the Laurier Heterodox Campus Community

June 3, 2025

Wilfrid Laurier University’s student newspaper, The Cord, recently became part of the story—not for breaking news, but for misreporting it. The story involved a March 6, 2024 lecture by lawyer Lisa Bildy, hosted by the Laurier Heterodox Campus Community. Titled “How much of their speech rights must professionals relinquish to practice in Canada?”, the talk explored the legal risks faced by professionals who express views that diverge from the prevailing orthodoxy of their regulatory bodies.

Among Bildy’s clients is Amy Hamm, a British Columbia nurse investigated after co-sponsoring a billboard that read “I ❤️ JK Rowling.” Though the message was labeled transphobic by critics, Bildy’s legal concern was not identity politics—it was the right of professionals to express political opinions without professional retaliation.

The Cord’s original article, published April 3 under the headline “Unionize WLU Cancels the Hate on Campus,” gave scant attention to Bildy’s arguments. Instead, it echoed the language and framing of protestors—Unionize WLU, faculty allies, the AVPDEI, and student activists—while failing to interview the event’s organizers or provide a summary of what Bildy actually said. The effect was not coverage, but advocacy. Readers were left with a caricature in place of a report.

Basic errors compounded the problem. Bildy’s name was repeatedly misspelled as “Blidy”—a small error that, in context, felt like a telling one. Typos happen, but this one reinforced the impression that the reporter shared the protestors’ contempt and had little interest in objectivity.

In response, the Heterodox Campus Community submitted a letter to the editor on May 6, clarifying that the lecture focused on Charter rights, not gender identity, and inviting readers to view a full recording of the talk. Rather than publish the letter or issue a correction, The Cord silently revised the article and reissued it on May 24 with a new headline: “Students protest Lisa Bildy’s presentation on campus.” The revised version improved in tone and accuracy—it corrected the spelling, added quotes from the organizers, and acknowledged their role in hosting the event. But these were back-end edits, accompanied only by a vague editor’s note that the piece had been “updated.”

This matters. Transparency isn’t a courtesy in journalism; it’s the bedrock of credibility. When substantive errors are quietly corrected, it gives the impression of concealment, not accountability. Readers deserve to know when and why a story has changed. Silent revisions may smooth things over in the short term, but they erode trust over time.

And trust in journalism is already in crisis. A recent Gallup poll shows media trust in North America at a historic low. Journalist Matt Taibbi attributes this collapse to the media’s increasing preference for narrative over accuracy. “Getting things right is hard enough,” he writes. “The minute we try to do anything else in this job, the wheels come off. Until we get back to the basics, we don’t deserve to be trusted. And we won’t be.”

Student journalism is, above all, educational. Errors are inevitable; the key is how they are handled. When student reporters and editors learn to own mistakes, issue proper corrections, and welcome intellectual pluralism, they strengthen not only their publication but their professional integrity. Journalism is not activism with citations. It is a discipline rooted in fairness, precision, and accountability.

The deeper issue, though, goes beyond a single article. It speaks to the university’s broader duty to foster an environment where a range of perspectives is not merely tolerated but actively engaged. True learning demands exposure to dissenting, even uncomfortable, views. The protestors who condemned Bildy before hearing her speak were not engaging in dialogue—they were policing the boundaries of permissible speech. But universities are not temples of orthodoxy. They are arenas of argument.

Bildy’s lecture raised a legitimate question: Can professionals in Canada express dissenting views without risking their careers? Whether one agrees or not, it is a question worth debating—and the right to ask it deserves protection.

This episode is not, ultimately, about Lisa Bildy or her critics. It is about the ethical responsibilities of those who report on public life. When journalists choose clarity over concealment, curiosity over conformity, and truth over tribalism, they don't just inform the campus—they elevate it.

Because the purpose of a university is not to echo consensus, but to test it.

This piece was drafted with the assistance of ChatGPT to refine structure and tone. The author is solely responsible for its content.