Category: Editorial

There are multiple times a week when we at The Bucknellian feel extremely frustrated. Yes, the faulty printer in the newsroom and the constant flooding in the basement of Roberts are terribly annoying. But nothing is more exasperating than a lack of response on the part of University organizations, certain administrative bodies and particularly students, when we are looking for different opinions and standpoints regarding issues on campus.

We can have a great story, one that is both timely and relevant to campus life, but without willing interviewees to help give body and life to the article, a good article topic is absolutely nothing. Without the viewpoints of the campus community–students, professors, the administration, Public Safety–it is impossible to report on an issue on campus in a fair and truthful manner. This response problem is two-fold. A lack of response, after we have reached out to particular parties for their thoughts on certain issues, radiates disrespect and indifference. If we have taken the time to reach out to you, at least send us a response. Any response. These negative habits will only come back to haunt guilty parties in the future. Common courtesies such as these can make or break a job interview, for example.

Secondly, this lack of response leaves a gaping hole in our publication. We strive to report in an unbiased way but how can we do so if no one is willing to share his or her views? The ‘small world’ environment that our campus exudes makes it extremely difficult to get a variety of quotations and stances for articles, particularly for more ‘sensitive’ topics. Years working on this publication have shown us that students feel uncomfortable talking about some topics, or even pressured to give doctored quotations or viewpoints for fear of backlash by both the administration and their fellow students. Why should students think twice about speaking their minds? Why would they face alienation by doing so?

There have been a number of times this semester when we have had opportunities to report on important, controversial and fascinating issues. Where we able to? No, because without participation from the campus community, we cannot write lasting stories. Lack of response has crippled The Bucknellian, forcing us to report on more trivial matters than we would like. Where are the determined, forceful and ambitious students that the University admitted? We specifically remember a question on the University’s application for admission that addressed ‘making a change in the world.’ How can we students make a difference if we don’t make our voices heard? Speak up. It’s as simple as making a statement in a newspaper article.

Discrimination, in every sense of the word, is prevalent on college campuses throughout the United States. Drawing attention to this discrimination is important, but we can’t help but wonder if these rallies that bring attention to hate have any lasting impact.

These rallies emit positive images about change and acceptance, but the feelings can sometimes be fleeting. There are multiple philanthropy events taking place in the coming weeks, each of which raises money for its respective cause. This past week, Colleges Against Cancer raised over $6,000 for cancer research. Over fall break, Tau Kappa Epsilon fraternity will run from Lewisburg to Washington, D.C. to raise money for the Alzheimer’s Association. Would it be productive to raise money for LGBT and civil rights organizations? We are aware that the organizations present have fund-raising opportunities and we know that they are more successful in raising awareness and aid than a rally does.

What exactly does it mean to “stop the hate”? How exactly can we stop people from hating?

Rallying for something like this is a great concept, and we don’t mean to sound pessimistic, especially in light of the recent Campus Climate Report. Theoretically, it is a great idea for a great cause; however, in practicality, it is incredibly difficult to change the fundamental views of the hateful and spiteful. It is impossible to control an entire population. Raising awareness about hate is not going to change someone’s mind, especially if he feels strongly enough about a certain issue as to ‘hate’ it. But frankly put, a rally will not stop ‘haters from hating.’

Although it’s hard to believe, University seniors are already sending out résumés and cover letters to employers all over the country in hopes of landing a job before graduation in May. Unfortunately for most of the graduating class, the outlook isn’t too promising. This week’s Employer Expo only seemed to emphasize the fact that finding a job with a liberal arts major is extremely difficult and the job market is overwhelmingly competitive. Seniors on The Bucknellian staff participated in the Employer Expo, but we left discouraged and frustrated by the apparent lack of jobs available. Our liberal arts majors didn’t seem to provide us with any competitive edge in the job market.

At first we were frustrated with the lack of diversity in the employer pool at Tuesday’s expo and our first reaction was to find someone to blame. Why was there a significantly greater amount of engineering and accounting headhunters than any other career path? Yes, we want to blame the University for seemingly favoring a certain type of student over another, but we simply cannot do that because it’s not fair. The Career Development Center (CDC) is not at fault in this situation. Students have to find out when, how and why certain employers hire. While employers are actively seeking college graduates (or soon-to-be graduates) with engineering and accounting majors, the same cannot be said for the rest of us.

We can’t blame the CDC. They really do seem to be doing everything they can to provide us with opportunities to find jobs. There are various expos that take place in cities like New York, Boston and Washington, D.C. that having the CDC makes available to students. In addition, later on in the year, the CDC provides job and internship fairs that are geared more towards the liberal arts majors. However, these fairs are typically recruiting interns and not full-time employees.

It’s frustrating to see our peers land jobs before us liberal arts majors, but we choose our own paths and now we have to stick with them. Some of the career paths we have chosen take a little more effort to get our foot in the door and soon-to-be graduates need to realize that and prepare.

The recent release of the Campus Climate Task Force Report by President Bravman has many students up in arms about the suggested changes to the University’s current academic and social conditions.

At The Bucknellian, we have been in communication with students, faculty and the administration throughout the past year about issues concerning campus climate. Last fall we dedicated the majority of an edition to the sexual assaults reported on campus. While we understand where the administration is coming from, and we can agree with the task force in some areas, we believe that some of the results may have been skewed out of proportion to highlight the negative aspects of our campus community.

One of the concerns we have with the report is lack of diversity from the pool from which the administration pulled statistics. According to the report, the task force used data majorly collected from members of the 2007, 2009 and 2010 graduating classes on a voluntary response basis. A large amount of the students polled in these surveys were also incoming first-years. Why wasn’t there a fairer representation of the student body in the task force data? How many sophomores, juniors and current seniors were polled during this time period? Obviously first-year students and outgoing seniors will have radically different perceptions of their time at the University. It only seems necessary to fill that gap to get a clear picture. Although data collection is hard, especially when a very limited amount of students participate, it is important to get a broad spectrum of statistics. That means encouraging students to answer these surveys truthfully or else no one can really take the statistics seriously.

In addition, the Sexual Experiences Survey was administered to an overwhelmingly female majority. Only 114 students out of the 1,023 surveyed were men. This doesn’t leave a large response bias. It would have been more accurate to include more male students. What was the non-response rate of these surveys? The fact that the task force only polled those students who were willing to go out of their way to submit their responses creates a response bias that cannot be overlooked.

We also think the task force has skewed the statistics towards a more negative angle. The task force places a heavy emphasis on the negatives of drinking, but it should be noted more clearly that drug use at the University is lower than comparable institutions. In addition, first-year students were over-represented in these samples. College freshmen tend to experiment with drinking a lot more than sophomores, juniors and seniors. We would have appreciated a more diverse statistic.

Through the climate report, President Bravman and the task force have expressed their severe dissatisfaction with Greek life and the way it impacts campus. Yes, Greek life can split the campus and create social divisions. However, an overwhelming amount of the philanthropic activities conducted on and around campus are done by Greek members. Although members of the Greek life here at the University are required to complete a certain number of ‘hours’ for philanthropy, the fact of the matter is, this is how it gets done. If it were not for the Greek system, philanthropy at the University would almost cease to exist. Although the Office of Civic Engagement offers many opportunities to students, many people aren’t aware of how to utilize it to its fullest.

We agree with the task force in that the University should be advertising more student-based activities, like Bingo, karaoke and other events at Uptown and in the ELC. However, it’s often the case that students don’t find going to Bingo as appealing as going to a fraternity party. While we know that there are students on campus that don’t participate in Greek life, the majority of them do, and the majority of them drink. This is not surprising in the least considering students drink when in college and there is a certain party atmosphere on campus. We don’t think the administration can change this. Even if the administration decides to eliminate Greek life all together, students who want to have fun by partying will find ways to do so. What’s more is that a large amount of alumni donators were members in Greek organizations on campus. If the administration gets rid of Greek life, alumni will stop donating to the University and the University’s College Rankings will lower.

We also have to disagree with the idea that Greek life is unsafe for men and women on campus. When fraternities decide to host parties on or off campus, they are legally responsible for all those attending. It is their best interest to keep things safe. The same goes for sororities and events that they host. It is in both organizations’ best interest so they can stay clean in the eyes of the Panhellenic and Interfraternity Councils. And closing Greek Life parties to first-years? Doesn’t that counteract Bucknell’s mission state of community? How are first-years supposed to feel a part of campus when they are forbidden from attending certain parties or events?

We understand the task force has good intentions and that there are issues on campus that need to be addressed. That being said, the skewed statistics and goals the University is proposing are extreme. Punish members of the community who need to be punished. The administration did that with the Sigma Alpha Epsilon and Kappa Delta Rho fraternities. All others, those Greek organizations and students who are following the rules, should not be penalized.

There are two times during the year when campus experiences a ridiculous amount of flooding: during the fall, typically in September, and during the spring, typically in late March to mid April. Each time the campus and the surrounding downtown Lewisburg area floods, it poses an enormous inconvenience to students, faculty and staff. Granted, the flooding has not been this bad in a long time, but the fact of the matter is it happens like clockwork every year.

The flooding this week has shed light on some topics that we have discussed pertaining to the University’s support of students living downtown. Should the University provide for those students who need to be relocated, either due to flooding or any other type of natural disaster? A flooding of this magnitude doesn’t typically happen, but whether we like it or not, it is happening right now. Should the University be prepared to house students who are evacuated from downtown houses and misplaced for days, even weeks at a time? While we understand that students sign a contract and agree to live downtown on certain conditions, is it their responsibility to find a new place to live if this occurs? While it’s great that the University is supporting it’s students in the short-term, should students and the University be working together to form a long-term plan?

The recent flooding hasn’t only caused us to question the University administration, but students as well. We don’t quite understand why students, after having been told to move their vehicles from certain ‘high risk’ parking places, such as Sixth Street and Harris Parking Lot, continue to park their cars in said areas. We understand that there are a limited amount of parking spaces on campus but is it worth risking your car?

For those who don’t have access to cars on campus, the recent closure of the tunnel under Route 15 connecting Bucknell West with the main campus has been forcing students to cross the highway, something the administration has directly advised against. How are students supposed to cross the highway at night if they are coming home late, say, from the library? Should the University provide a shuttle transportation services to the main campus to Bucknell West, especially for circumstances like these?

Furthermore, students seem to have taken the wrong attitude towards the flooding. The prospect of having no classes for a few days is certainly exciting, but it should not in any way be a point of rejoicing when people–other Bucknellians–are losing their houses. This is not an event to take lightly.

Flooding is a natural event that we have literally no control over. However, it is possible to mitigate the toll that it has on the campus community.

Buying and selling textbooks is an age-old dilemma that every college student faces multiple times in his or her academic career. When we were first-years, some of us were neither intelligent nor motivated enough to research alternate options for textbooks. Therefore, when we bought our textbooks, we bought them straight from the bookstore. Things have clearly changed.

It is quite clear that it is becoming nearly impossible for any one business to have a monopoly over the textbook industry. Yes, Borders has been liquidated and Barnes & Noble is one of the only free-standing bookstore chains still in existence. But that does not mean students are forced to rely solely on them for their academic literature. Economic times are tough, and students are willing to do literally anything to save a buck on books. Consequently, book-selling companies are willing to do literally anything to get the business of eager students.

It’s clear that purchasing books from online companies is much cheaper than purchasing from the bookstore on campus. However, is renting books, be it from the University bookstore or an online organization, more beneficial than purchasing them and reselling? Yes, renting a textbook from the bookstore can give a student up to 50 percent off of the retail price. But when you return the book, and let’s assume you are returning it on time (therefore no late charges) you are making no profit. You lost money renting that book. When students buy books from an online retailer at an already discounted price, and then resell them at close to the same price, it is already a significant profit gain. If a student is savvy and determined, he or she can make a profit. However, most University students don’t spend hours around their computer negotiating prices on textbooks when they could be doing other things. What’s more important, if a student is taking an obscure anthropology class on the basics of consumption and material culture, who else in the world would be willing to buy back his or her book at an elevated price? How can that student make a profit?

The choice students make comes down to convenience. How much time are students willing to put into their book hunting? The cheapest and easiest way to get our books is off of websites like Amazon.com, but we are not quite sure if going through elaborate measures to acquire textbooks (renting and spending hours trying to resell) is worth our time. After all, time is money, and we have neither.

The University’s chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity (SAE) has been accused of hazing and illegal alcohol and drug use. The University, which claims to have accumulated substantial evidence against SAE, is threatening the chapter with either suspension from the University or criminal charges. We support the University’s “zero tolerance” anti-hazing policy and hope that, if the allegations against SAE are true, the University acts harshly and justly in response.

Considering the huge number of policies the Greek office creates but doesn’t effectively enforce (for example, the “no unregistered parties” rule, the “no mixers” rule, and the wristband rule for registered parties, among many others), we are happy to see the administration taking action on this problem. We are especially happy to see the problem being addressed before someone has gotten badly hurt.

We suspect that hazing is much more rampant at this University than administrators formally acknowledge. As is evident from the widespread binge drinking that takes place approximately three times a week, many students have a habit of being reckless, apparently assuming that nothing bad will happen to them. At least some students seem to apply this dangerous attitude to the concept of hazing as well.

The student body has no excuse not to know what hazing is, especially considering all of the educational programs that members of the Greek system are forced to attend. However, peer pressure reinforces whatever systems are already in place. Even students uncomfortable with what is going on find themselves in a lose-lose situation: if they speak up in objection, they risk alienating themselves and being ostracized from their desired group of friends. Although we may question why a student would want to be friends with a group insistent on hazing, having to find an entirely new group of friends is a formidable task that is much easier said than done. It is unsurprising, then, that students might prefer to endure hazing than risk this other option.

For this reason, change realistically must come from the group level rather than the individual level. Organizations that haze, including non-Greek students as well, must rethink their procedures and reevaluate their priorities. Students must reaffirm a commitment to actually caring about the people they are ostensibly initiating as friends. Such a commitment is completely incompatible with hazing.

We applaud the Greek office and University administration for taking action, because students need a wake-up call. Hopefully this can be that wake-up call; hopefully we won’t need to see a body.

In the past week, allegations have surfaced accusing best-selling author Greg Mortenson of fabricating parts of his book “Three Cups of Tea” and mismanaging funds intended for his nonprofit organization. This controversy is making the University confront two difficult questions: first, whether the book should still be used for next year’s first-year reading experience; and second, whether Mortenson should be brought to campus to speak in the Bucknell Forum as originally planned.

In regard to the first question, we do not think that the controversy undermines the value of “Three Cups of Tea” as a first-year reading experience, and we suspect that, if anything, it might even enhance it. Is the value of a book necessarily fundamentally changed by the fact that it may not be strictly true? Must controversies regarding a book’s author necessarily taint the message of a book? We’re not so sure; we suspect that what the reader gets out of the book might be what really matters.

The controversy surrounding “Three Cups of Tea” will open up whole new possibilities for topics of discussion among first-year students. Discussions can still center on the actual content of the book, but now they can include additional intriguing topics such as ethics, morality, and academic dishonesty. Even the topic of whether the book should have been used can now be a legitimate point of discussion. Furthermore, the scandal might compel students to pay more attention to the book than they might have otherwise. Even if their ultimate judgments are critical, they can be taught how to make these criticisms in academically useful ways. At any rate, controversy often makes a book more interesting, so we should take advantage of this opportunity to capture student interest.

The question of whether to have Mortenson speak in the Bucknell Forum is more complicated because doing so would be not merely using his book, but directly honoring him. It would implicitly link him with the renowned and highly-respected speakers who have appeared at the Bucknell Forum in the past, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Jody Williams, Twyla Tharp, Niall Ferguson, and most recently Brian Greene. As a University, we must carefully consider whether we actually want to do that.

It’s not as if the Forum hasn’t also welcomed controversial speakers in the past. For example, it allowed Doris Kearns Goodwin to speak in September 2008 despite the accusations of plagiarism that she faced; it also allowed Ayaan Hirsi Ali to speak in March 2009 despite widespread debates about the way in which she characterized Muslims. However, these weren’t among the University’s most positive moments, so we can’t recommend that they consciously be repeated. Furthermore, if—as was demonstrated last fall—first-years can’t even maintain respect for someone like Howard Gardner, forcing them to attend a talk by Mortenson may be asking for trouble.

Still, Mortenson’s message is positive and powerful, even if he may not live up to it himself. We don’t think that the message should be completely forgotten because of largely unproven allegations. But we do hope that the University holds him up to the same standards as it would any other major speaker.

The student community was recently captivated by the story of Parinaz Hadi ’12, who made it to the Final Four of a March Madness-style popularity contest on a website called BarstoolU. The reason this story made it into The Bucknellian is because it captured the attention of so huge a portion of the student community. We’ve heard more students talking about this than just about any other recent story we could have conceivably covered—and while we are willing to meet our readers’ demands for the sake of maintaining a readership, students’ attitudes toward this story nevertheless upset us.

We have no problem with Hadi’s decision to participate in the contest, and we can understand why she was excited about it. Good for her that she did well; it’s got to be gratifying to know that that many people care about you or are interested in you or at least find you attractive. We don’t have the desire or the right to tell anyone what to do with their lives to make themselves happy.

However, we are baffled by the enormity of the student response. Hadi received 215,000 votes, and an administrator from the website commented that he had “never seen anything like” the interest demonstrated by students and that he had been bombarded with “Facebook messages and tweets and emails and hand-written snail mail letters from everyone on campus asking me vote tallies.” It seemed everyone on campus was talking about the contest during the time of the voting, and Facebook campaigns constantly reminded us to vote as often as possible. Furthermore, it wasn’t just male students who were involved in this, and interest spread far beyond the group of people who personally knew Hadi.

In light of constant talk on campus about campus climate issues, in light of the sororities’ recent declaration against misogyny, and in light of the on-going discussion about how we need to be better people and objectify each other less, it is disappointing to see so much of the student body take so much interest in what is essentially a “hottest college girl” contest.

We’re not entirely sure what sparked this interest. Surely some students wanted to support Hadi and others considered themselves to be helping the University’s reputation, taking pride in her success. People were also hugely excited by the huge number of kegs BarstoolU was supposedly going to bring to campus if Hadi won, disregarding the logistical problems of planning such a party at a school where kegs aren’t even allowed, and this motivation is more troubling. Is this what students really care about on campus—having big parties and proving that our girls are the hottest? Did students really have nothing better to talk about than this contest on a website that few had previously heard of? It seems that all of the people admirably striving for a better campus climate have a long way to go.

At this point in the semester, virtually everywhere you turn on campus, someone is raising money for some type of charity. With the Day without Shoes last Tuesday, Bands and Bikes and the Running of the Bison coming up this weekend, the Management 101 companies selling their products, many students already collecting donations for Relay for Life, and many more similar events on the horizon, there is no excuse to not be aware of how many important causes need our help. These philanthropic efforts are generally at least moderately successful, but at the same time, observing how people participate in them makes us question how much the student community really cares.

For example, we saw few people on campus actually participate in the Day without Shoes. While this was surely largely due to the cold and rainy weather, truly dedicated students should have participated nevertheless. The willingness of those students who did participate to brave the weather significantly increased the visibility of their cause, emphasizing the plight of people who must go without shoes in bad weather as well as good. We commend the students who went without shoes, but we wish that more would have joined them.

Despite the prevalence of philanthropic efforts on campus, we wonder just how deeply students actually care about them. Greeks raise thousands of dollars and work many service hours for various charitable organizations, but we suspect that these endeavors have more to do with Plan for Prominence requirements than with genuine passion—hence the many students who go out of the way to get their hours in the least effort-intensive ways possible. Most people who buy Management 101 products do so because they want the products, not because they particularly care where the profits go.

We wonder if the student community might be suffering from a sort of “charity fatigue.” Students cannot participate in all of the worthy causes without either spending a huge amount of money or ultimately contributing a small, insignificant amount to each individual cause. Furthermore, with so many people soliciting time and money for so many important charities, we are worried that students are starting to tune them out; the presence of so many events makes it harder to get excited about any particular ones. Perhaps if we concentrated more of our efforts as a community on a smaller number of causes, we could get more deeply involved and ultimately make more of an impact.

Still, with the possible exception of students required to do charity for classes, at least the students organizing all these events really do care deeply about them. The end result may not be enough to cause major widespread social change, but it is still more than what was started with. So while the attitudes of the larger University community toward charity may not be ideal, what does get accomplished is certainly better than nothing.