'Journal' editors resign in protest

News that the editor-in-chief of the Wharton Journal has been receiving $1,500 per semester for his work has prompted the resignation of two of the newspaper's top officials. In an open letter to the Wharton community, Wharton Journal Editor-in-chief Sameer Mithal disclosed details of the stipend and announced the resignation of the managing editor and production director of the publication, neither of which received payment for their work. The stipend has been a tradition at the Journal for five years and is applied toward the cost of tuition, said Mithal, a Wharton graduate student. Since its inception, the money has remained a private issue between the editor and the University. Mithal discussed the stipend in yesterday's issue of the Journal, in which he admits that the monetary compensation had been kept secret from his co-workers, who were under the impression that all staff members operated under volunteer status. "There was no reason for any of my fellow members of the Journal staff to believe that I was not a volunteer, as all other writers were and remain today," Mithal stated. Reached by phone last night, Mithal said he did not mean to keep the stipend a sequestered issue. "I was planning on telling them," he said. "It came up a little sooner than I wanted it to. It wasn't something that I planned on keeping secret the rest of the time." He added that, looking back on the events of the past weeks, he would have done things differently had he known the outcome of his decisions. "I probably would have rejected [the stipend]," he said. These sentiments were echoed in his letter. "In retrospect, I realize the seriousness of these issues: since the managing editor, production editor and I came together as a team with a commitment to each contribute 15 to 20 hours or more per week, I sincerely regret that I did not inform the entire staff of the Journal as soon as I was made aware of my stipend," the letter states. According to former Managing Editor and Wharton graduate student Josh Orenstein, Mithal told him of the stipend as they were discussing the paper's profitability. "We began to turn a profit this year, and I felt the profit should be shared among those who were contributing to the paper," he said. At that point, Mithal admitted that his contribution was not going unrewarded. Orenstein reacted by resigning, stating that this decision arose out of feelings of deception and dishonesty. "First of all, the paper was not what I thought it was," he said. "I thought we were an independent, student-run organization." Former Production Director Laurie Warden, also a Wharton graduate student, said she devoted her time under the pretense that each issue was the result of a voluntary effort. "I was recruited to help put the paper together, as part of what I believed was a team of volunteers that would work to put out the best paper possible," she said. "I have no problem with people being compensated, but Sameer had the opportunity and the chance to stop taking money from the financial aid pool, and he didn't do it." Both Orenstein and Warden said they believe the stipend compromised the integrity of the Journal, introducing a possible bias. "I'm not saying the contents of the paper were ever really affected, but I don't think [Mithal] understood the implications of a conflict of interest," Warden said. Orenstein agreed, and said that separation of the Wharton School from the paper is imperative. "It's a conflict of interest, because the editor-in-chief was being paid by the administration," he said. "Had I known [the stipend] existed, I never would have volunteered for the paper." Mithal wrote that he has returned all payments given to him, and that a committee has been formed to investigate questions of compensation.