Dear Reporter
I was greatly disappointed by the feature article written about our children’s librarian, Sherry Eckrich. The purpose of human interest journalism is to create awareness within a community of activities being carried on there. One of the most difficult tasks the feature writer faces is to strike a balance between emotionalism and ‘a judicious regard for the facts. This you failed to achieve.
Opening with a dismal description of a dwelling in front of which a story was to be read to five youngsters, you claim without support — that this is their home. You then arbitrarily assume that their sno-cones constitute their mid-day meal.
Your description of our headquarters made it sound as though it had been struck by a cyclone. There may have been bits of broken bottles, but there are no bushes on our lawn, much less “overgrown” ones.
In any writing for a responsible publication, one should always attempt to make certain that all information is accurate. Miss Eckrich — the third letter of her name is a K, not an H — was employed by the Missouri Division of Welfare, Child Welfare Services, not the “Missouri Child Welfare Association”. She was also a full-time, “permanent substitute” teacher at Cote Brilliante School, not an “assistant teacher”.
Your ancedote concerning the mother who instructed her children to “pick up the soda bottles and trash from the lawn”, along with your derogatory description of our branch make our area sound like a dump. It also implies that parents in our area are not concerned with broadening their offsprings’ horizons.
Our community is probably one of the most peacefully and productively integrated areas in America’s most racist city (the latter fact is attested to by a recent survey). For you to meander briefly along one of our streets and then state that “there did not appear to be much interchange among the children of these families” (black and white) is a most unfortunate inference, as there is a great deal of intermingling both, among children and adults on that block.
Your alleged quote of Miss Eckrich’s is perhaps the most upsetting of your errors and exaggerations, however. She merely stated that the children from the more affluent areas are more verbal than others. It is true that they are more interested or, as one would naturally infer from what you wrote, they visit the library more frequently than children from poorer families. The majority of our juvenile library users come from low income families.
Your constant referral to black children according to their race is most unfortunate. That you cannot simply see a child rather than a race is disheartening. The photographs accompanying the article substantiate the fact that there are both blacks and whites in our community. Why must you call attention to this in a negative fashion? Why such things as “As Miss Echrich (sic) read to the boy (why not say “white boy” if you are going to be consistent) a few black children skirted her magic circle, but didn’t step into it in spite of her urging.”
I had anticipated a factual reporting of our activities here. Instead, I encountered an article full of inaccuracies. As I read it, I was embittered. Reflecting on it now, I have only regret for your lack of sensitivity and a feeling that you have done our library, the community, and Miss Eckrich an injustice.
Charles M. Brown Acting Branch Librarian
Originally published in The Paper, September 1970.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Original source: SD_Times1970_09.pdf, printed page(s) 2.
