The Office of the Ombudsman is a separate entity from The Flat Hat. We look into complaints and welcome criticism from the public so that the paper can be held accountable and improve over time. That being said, the office also has the authority to defend the paper’s policies if necessary. Therefore, we would like to issue some clarifications about certain Flat Hat practices, specifically the editor’s note.
The Flat Hat’s Office of the Ombudsman issued its May 14 Editor’s Note on the article titled: “Inclusion for me but not for thee: Response to ‘W&M Pride: Inclusion for who?’” to provide additional factual context regarding references to Drag & Drop’s Code of Conduct in the May 5 opinion column “Inclusion for me but not for thee.”
Specifically, the note clarified that the version of the Code of Conduct referenced in the column was adopted after the fall 2025 event discussed in the piece and that no university policy in effect at the time was determined to have been violated.
The decision to append an Editor’s Note was made in accordance with standard editorial practices for opinions content. The purpose of the note was to provide readers with additional context while preserving the integrity of the original published opinion piece. The Flat Hat did not determine that the column required retraction or removal.
The Flat Hat further determined that the appropriate editorial remedy was to provide clarifying context through an Editor’s Note, rather than remove or substantially alter the referenced portion of the opinion piece. While the referenced version of Drag & Drop’s Code of Conduct was adopted after the fall 2025 event discussed in the column, the organization’s policies and standards remained relevant to the broader commentary and perspective presented by the authors. The Editor’s Note was therefore intended to clarify the timeline for readers while preserving the integrity and context of the original published opinion.
The Flat Hat further notes that opinion articles are distinct from news reporting and are intended to provide space for interpretation, criticism and personal perspective. The addition of an Editor’s Note was not intended to endorse or repudiate the underlying viewpoint expressed by the authors, but rather to ensure readers had access to relevant contextual information while preserving the distinction between factual clarification and opinion commentary.
As a general editorial practice, The Flat Hat does not remove published articles except in extraordinary circumstances. Maintaining archived content preserves the public record, ensures accountability and transparency in the editorial process and allows readers to evaluate published viewpoints in their original context.
It is The Flat Hat’s longstanding practice for corrections, clarifications and editor’s notes to appear at the conclusion of published articles. Different news organizations maintain varying correction formats and placement conventions, all of which may remain consistent with established journalistic ethics and professional standards, including those outlined by the Society of Professional Journalists.
Additionally, The Flat Hat remains committed to providing opportunities for reader responses. As such, any member of the campus community is welcome to submit an opinion piece for consideration by emailing the Opinions section at fhopinions@gmail.com.
The Flat Hat does not seek to censor members of the campus community, even when viewpoints expressed may differ from those of staff members or other readers. The Opinions section exists to encourage dialogue, disagreement and the exchange of perspectives within the bounds of established editorial standards.
The Flat Hat and the Office of the Ombudsman take concerns raised by members of the campus community seriously and remain committed to accuracy, transparency and consistency in editorial standards. We hope that this statement clarifies any questions on The Flat Hat’s policies and practices.
