More than 100 protestors were arrested in an April 18 police sweep of the “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” on the Columbia University campus, authorized by university president Minouche Shafik. The university’s gates have been mostly closed to outside press, citing security, except for a few hours a day. Since then, the Columbia Daily Spectator’s student journalists have been the primary source of information about the increasingly contentious pro-Palestine and pro-Israel demonstrations on the university’s campus.
The moment has been exciting and exhausting for the Spectator’s reporters. One is Noah Bernstein, a deputy news editor at the Spectator. The National Press Club Journalism Institute’s Bara Vaida reached out to Bernstein last week to talk to the 19-year-old sophomore about how he is managing his reporting while studying for finals.
What’s it like to be a student journalist covering this moment right now?
Bernstein: Being a student journalist is both the biggest asset and liability at this moment because there are various [times when] only Columbia affiliates, including students, are able to access campus, [and] members of major media outlets [cannot]. So being a student journalist [means we are the only ones who can] cover [the story]. On the flip side, we are still students. We have our last day of class on Monday. We have finals soon thereafter. I don’t think I, or any of my colleagues, have ever written and edited and taken photos and interviewed and reported at the level that we have been doing in the past week.
Have you felt concerned for your personal safety?
Bernstein: Thankfully, I haven’t. We’ve made our own press passes, and I make a point of wearing my pass around campus during moments of particularly high tension. So, that felt like an extra layer of defense, although I haven’t felt like I’ve needed it to ensure my safety.
If the protests hadn’t happened, what was a normal day for you at the paper before all of this?
Bernstein: My traditional beat is admissions and university finance. Both of which have, in the past, been two of the bigger issues that we’ve written about. That was something that I really enjoyed writing about. But so much has changed since October 7 in our reporting, and even more has changed in the past week.
Tell me more about that change.
Bernstein: Many of us have become [U.S.] congressional correspondents. I spent last Wednesday morning (April 17) on a train down to D.C. with a number of my colleagues to cover the Shafik hearing and … got to cover a moment that catalyzed what we are seeing today. Since then, none of us have stopped working. Groups of [us have been working] in various parts of campus, huddling around our computers, writing, editing, and sourcing pretty much 24/7. One of us is probably up at least until 3 a.m. and [and someone else] is waking up [and reporting] as early as 7 a.m. It’s been thrilling.
And is everyone being supportive of one another as staff. Are there any divisions about how to cover this story?
Bernstein: There’s always disagreement, like any newsroom, but the general consensus [is that] actually [everyone has] been quite collaborative and supportive. I’ve even gotten to engage with a number of Spectator alumni, all of whom have been supportive both with their expertise and insight and, in some cases, with sourcing. And then in more practical cases like people [have been] just sending us money to buy food, [so when we are working] in the office overnight, [it’s] frankly [been] quite nice to have Panda Express on the Spectator’s dollar.
Has it been challenging to separate your own personal feelings about how this story is unfolding while also maintaining objectivity as a reporter?
Bernstein: I have opinions. I’m an opinionated person. I think one thing that’s been an important central belief of mine is that …. delivering facts is absolutely the most important thing for any important opinion to be argued. That has reigned supreme, at least for me, [and] for many other members of our newsroom. [This experience] has been, … endlessly intellectually stimulating. Also, unfortunately, emotionally stifling. But that’s par for the course. Right? And at the same time … certainly in my reporting and just in friendly, casual conversations, [many] envy my position on Spectator because it’s a platform for me to engage with issues that are very complex and need to be dealt with and [being a reporter] is a great way to do that.
I want to follow up on something you said, which is that this experience has been both thrilling and emotionally stifling. What do you mean by that?
Bernstein: I appreciate you giving me a chance to flesh that out. I don’t want it to be interpreted as something where I have an emotion that I know and feel quite strongly about that I am actively suppressing on a day-to-day basis. It’s more than that. It’s that the velocity of the news has been so rapid, that it’s all I have been doing … [reporting the story] … and that has come at the expense of thinking about where I stand on many of these issues myself. … I want to be able to hold both the intellectual side of this issue and the emotional side of this issue, and…. that has been a big balancing act for many of us on staff.
Got it. So what has been most surprising to you over the past week of covering this story?
Bernstein: The earnest and frequent support that I’ve received from people from all parts of campus life, friends, faculty, friends from back home, [and people] who have no affiliation with Columbia but who have been following our reporting very closely and have been complimenting [the coverage] in a way that feels encouraging. Many of us on staff are not used to reaching such a wide audience of readers. I used to be excited when a piece would get a few thousand engagements online. And now we’re looking at hundreds of thousands of eyes on this coverage. … And our coverage is now a part of the [national] discourse. It is a pleasant surprise. Also, somewhat daunting, but it’s welcome.
A lot of the media outside of Columbia have been relying on the Spectator’s reports. What do you think of the media’s coverage of what is happening on your campus?
Bernstein: I have been so consumed by our own coverage that I don’t feel that I have an honest assessment of what other outlets are publishing. But generally speaking, there has been a more intense tilt on the negative elements of the demonstrations and its fallout. Many [students] are just going about their day on campus, who essentially have no dog in the fight. I think for many of those students, it’s a concerning, tense, and uncomfortable [moment].
What I have noticed is a lot of criticism of the media’s coverage of the protests in that because they aren’t there, they don’t actually know what’s going on.
Bernstein: That’s similar to [what can happen in] local journalism. Right? It’s like national coverage of a very local issue. If a local story gets a lot of attention from national outlets, it can sometimes be lacking the right sensitivity. Those are things that I think we at the Spectator have been able to do better. We’ve been able to be more attuned to those [local] things.
What are some of the stories that you think aren’t being covered right now that could or should be covered?
Bernstein: I think there’s the general story of the portion of campus [students who are] simply here to get a degree and have not been protesting. I think that’s a pretty large number of people. … people who have no identity here with some of these issues, and their campus has been sucked into something that is … entirely unrelated to them.