We are not immune to mea culpas — might as well get it out of the way

Let me be perfectly clear: You will not like every story we publish here on Oxford Karma. You will not agree with all of our opinions. You especially won’t laugh at every joke we make. That said, this site was created out of an appreciation for the judgment and intellect of those desperate for an alternative, Oklahoma-based news source. We promised to be different, to provide you with insight and commentary that connects and is in touch with a growing yet underrepresented demographic. Earlier today, we broke that promise.

In our introductory post, I wrote that “[Oxford Karma’s] content will be at times folksy and humorous, others intellectually stimulating, but it will always be projected through a fearlessly honest and unfiltered lens.” This absolutely is still the case. We are going to feature social commentary on this site with regularity, and we’ll do so from an outsider’s perspective. I hope that our readers will find it just as entertaining as it is insightful. Our post earlier today — which was assigned by me — was not libelous or defamatory, nor were there any factual inaccuracies to speak of. From a journalistic standpoint, it holds up. But while I perceived the angle and tone to be interesting and relevant to our readership, it’s abundantly clear that I desperately missed the mark.

After much deliberation and reflection, we decided to remove the story in question this morning as we found ourselves agreeing with those who were deeply concerned about the direction this site was perceived to be heading. We don’t want to be that outlet; it goes against everything we stand for and it does not align with the content that had been previously published or that we were planning to publish. But my sincere hope is that one misstep — albeit a significant one — doesn’t detract from all of the pertinent, imaginative, and one-of-a-kind content that our immensely talented (and growing) array of writers has assembled in less than a week’s time. And it’s only going to get better.

It will never be our policy here to remove posts that have even a semblance of disagreement amongst our readership, and we will readily defend every story we publish that aligns with our mission. Regretfully, this morning’s feature did not. But rest assured that, going forward, everything you read on this site will be reflective of what has been glaringly absent in state and local journalism, and every published word will be in line with what we ultimately want Oxford Karma to be.

It cannot be emphasized enough: We are so incredibly flattered and excited by the outpouring of support we’ve received in our fledgling days. The thirst for the things we plan to cover (and the way in which we cover them) is fervent, as anyone who attended our launch party or visited our site can vouch. Where this wild ride takes us is anyone’s guess, but we hope you’ll remain by our side as we embark upon it. We’ll save you a seat.

  • Rob Vera

    What is the story in question? This is the issue with fully removing a story/article. If for any reason, you read this late, both of these pieces mean little to nothing–the original article in question and this one apologizing for something without explaining what it is.

    • You can still gather meaning from this post even without being familiar with the content of the article in question. If you think about it, it’s really not hard to figure out whose tone we’re referencing here.

      • Rob Vera

        Forgive me Zach, I seriously have no idea who or what this article is referencing. Maybe I should know and I’m just dense, but I don’t. If you can’t tell me or shoot me a link to something, that’s fine. Just figured I had to ask. LOVE the site so far, by the way. Excited for what you and Josh can bring.

        • Thanks, Rob. If you wanna shoot me an email (zach@oxfordkarma.com) I’ll explain in more detail.