To the Editor:
At first I found it interesting, then mildly amusing, and now it just seems pathetic. The Record’s constant bashing of the College Council does not inform the student body and inspire discussion, but rather it shows the ignorance and, if I may say, personal preferences of its editors. It is understood that there are always two sides to an issue, but one has to question the motives behind what has become weekly attacks on an organization voted for and supported by the vast majority of the campus.
I’m sure you at the Record would like to dispute my claim of “vast majority,” but that is to be expected. Your articles come at the behest of a small number of individuals who seem to enjoy criticizing simply for the sake of criticizing. Or, at best, they come in the form of a few angry letters from representatives of groups who for one reason or another were rubbed the wrong way by the Council. Your articles do not reflect the majority of the opinions on campus, if for no other reason than the fact that your articles are written by a proportionately small section of the student body.
Conversely, the College Council is elected by the entire student body, and decisions are made not at the whim of a few (as it is with your publication) but are backed by the opinions of an entire campus. I am a member of the Council; do you think for one second that I make a single decision without first emailing, discussing, and looking for any and all opinions from my constituents regarding the issue at hand? I personally make few decisions. How I vote and how I’m proud to say most of my fellow Council members vote is simply a reflection of constituents’ opinions. Perhaps you should take note of this if you would like your publication to truly reflect the entire student body as opposed to a few arbitrarily selected individuals.
Perhaps we should just make the editorial staff of the Record the new College Council, for it certainly seems that you think yourselves more than qualified. Perhaps then your weekly editorial would not be the same piece with a few new sentences cut and pasted to make it look original. Perhaps then advertisements for positions on the editorial staff would not openly joke about your zeal turned license to criticize the College Council. Perhaps then you at the Record would realize that your publication represents a proportionately small number of individuals as compared to the campus-elected College Council. Or, perhaps you simply will not even print this letter. Better yet, perhaps you can write another weekly editorial about the “shortcomings” of the College Council, this time pasting in that some of its members write pathetic letters to the Record. Perhaps it’s time to reevaluate your publication and the motivations that drive it.
Peter Krause ’02