ShareThis Page
News

Newsmaker: Kendall Valan

| Thursday, Dec. 11, 2014, 11:09 p.m.
The Entertainment Industries Council selected Kendall Valan’s video story “Student Suicide Aftermath: Who’s Responsible?” as the winner in the Journalism category of its Generation Next competition.
The Entertainment Industries Council selected Kendall Valan’s video story “Student Suicide Aftermath: Who’s Responsible?” as the winner in the Journalism category of its Generation Next competition.

Noteworthy: The Entertainment Industries Council selected Valan's video story “Student Suicide Aftermath: Who's Responsible?” as the winner in the Journalism category of its Generation Next competition. The competition for Western Pennsylvania college students is meant to encourage reporting on mental health issues. Valan chose the subject after seeing the effects a suicide had on the community of a small Philadelphia college her brother attends. The competition provides tools to aspiring journalists and, in Valan's case, connected her with a producer at WQED who served as a mentor and helped Valan refine her focus for the five-minute video story.

Age: 21

Residence: Lancaster

Education: Valan is a junior at Robert Morris University, where she majors in television and video production.

Quote: “It made me stop and think about how the conversation (about campus suicides) wasn't happening at Robert Morris and that maybe there should be some questions answered on the issue. ... I learned a lot from the experience, and learned there actually are a lot of resources at Robert Morris. This conversation needs to happen, and I think this is a great step.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me