Student Life Archives

Several Fridays ago, a friend inquired if I had had the chance to read the day’s news. I told him I hadn’t. Truth be told, I had not even expected to read Student Life’s news pages. But I also didn’t want to burst his bubble. So I asked if any particularly interesting stories had made the paper. He replied by mentioning that Student Life had run an article on the Wilderness Project and asked if I was familiar with the program. I wasn’t, which surprised him. Turns out my younger brother had been involved in the early planning stages of the Outing Club’s pre-orientation program.

He then continued by saying, happily, that the best thing about the article was that the paper had actually quoted him correctly! He had told the reporter what he thought and she had transcribed his precise words! I chuckled and asked, almost in disbelief, “Student Life? Really?” He smiled and said that he had been misquoted in the past, but not this time. I told him I was sorry and that the reporter was probably new: “She doesn’t yet know that she’s supposed to make mistakes.” Laughs all around.

But Student Life’s (many) defects ought not be stand-up material. They ought to be remedied, by staff and students alike. Published in a recent issue, Doug Burns’ suggestions for the paper and its staff are a good place to begin. First, cut out the fluff. Student Life need not run a front page “news story” on power outages in Eliot-the overwhelming majority of students already knew about the unfortunate incident. And instead of devoting valuable space to CS40’s expenditures on a recent formal, how about covering Dick Gephardt’s announcement that he is running for President of the United States. Most Washington University students, need I remind the editor in chief, live in his congressional district.

Second, replace the filler. Nearly all the articles in WU’s student newspaper ought to be written by-I know this is a radical notion-WU students. The paper thus ought not to publish news articles from electronic wire services.

Third, cover student activism. A greater percentage of news articles ought to address the various efforts students and campus organizations make on and off campus to better our world. I’d love, for example, to read an article on the impact social work practicum projects have on the St. Louis community. Or how the law school’s interdisciplinary environmental clinic (at which a roommate of mine recently worked) is this year promoting environmental protection.

Fourth, drastically limit-or better yet, totally eliminate-inaccuracies. Fact-check and spell-check. Research and redraft. And make sure that what is written on the page makes sense. The “Urban Scholars[hip]” program sure doesn’t. Opposite this page, Asha Haji complains that a recent Student Life news piece described her as an “Urban Scholar” rather than an “Ervin Scholar.” The Ervin Scholarship initiative is a highly selective program designed to attract the nation’s best and brightest black high school students (many of whom I now consider my friends) to WU. The “Urban Scholars[hip] Program,” which Student Life reports “grants black students academic merit-based scholarships,” doesn’t exist.

The mix-up is sort of understandable. Sort of. “Ervin” sounds a lot like “urban,” and an uniformed reporter might mistake one for the other over the telephone. But educated editors ought to know better, especially given the plethora of opinions published about the scholarship last November. And the consequences.

The “Urban Scholars[hip] Program” makes a nationally competitive scholarship that brings students to WU who would otherwise go to Harvard, Yale and Stanford sound like welfare, private education style. White suburban university assists needy urban black kids. Give me a break. The mistake is so ridiculous there is little I could do but laugh. As I did earlier.

But just as Student Life ought to shape up, so too must lifeless students. In the past several weeks, I’ve noticed a marked increase in the number of complaints about the paper. Some argue it poorly reports sports scores and statistics. Others complain about its editorial policy, which gives preference to opinions written about campus issues above those addressing international affairs. And many-myself included, because I am somehow signed up four times-protest our inability to unsubscribe from Student Life’s e-mail list. But as the criticism pours in, constructive assistance does not. Students complain about the paper, but few volunteer to better its condition.

Two years ago, after having had words put into my mouth by several different Student Life reporters, I jumped on the opportunity to never be misquoted again. How? I accepted an invitation to serve as an opinion editor. Student Life, aiming to prevent conflicts of interest and opportunities for self-aggrandizement, has a policy prohibiting reporters from quoting other staff members in news pieces. In the belly of the beast, I was thus safe from slander.

But as I prepare to soon leave the paper (Student Life is now accepting applications for my position, as well as other staff opportunities), I have begun to think about how I might ensure that I am-and others are-not misquoted anymore. I realized after but a moment’s reflection that I couldn’t accomplish my mission alone. So it goes for those who remain and will come after me on staff. Student Life will always be as lifeless, or as lively, as Washington University students themselves.

Scholarship was misidentified

To the editor:

I’d like to make a correction to the front page article for the Friday, Feb. 21st issue, “WU sends brief to Supreme Court.” It says that I am an “Urban Scholar” at Washington University. There is no such scholarship program. The program I am a part of is the John B. Ervin Scholars Program, which gets its namesake from the nationally recognized scholar who was the first African American dean at Washington University. This highly selective program celebrated its 15th anniversary in the fall, and has attracted some of the best and brightest students from all over the country.

Asha Haji
Engineering
Class of 2005

Mistake was not acceptable

To the editor:

As a Washington University alum, I enjoy keeping up with campus news.

While the news of the amicus curiae that WU submitted to the Supreme Court was great news, the support to affirmative action was typically quoting a “Urban Scholar” as you printed. The name of the scholarship is the John B. Ervin scholarship.

This type of typographical error is inexcusable. Perhaps you need to educate yourself and the rest of the WU community about the legacy of John B. Ervin.

I hope there will be a note in the next edition to correct this blatant error. Perhaps, someone could take my suggestion and write an article about John B. Ervin and other racial minorities that have contributed and are contributing to Washington Universities great heritage.

Geordana M. Evans
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2000

“Box guy” column was a waste

To the editor:

“Box guy” or “Mark” as he is also called, recently was the subject of an op-ed that caused me to wonder: is the Stud Life staff desperately lacking subject matter? Admittedly, it’s easier to fill space with paragraphs of hyperbole and sarcasm than with insightful or intelligent ideas. However, choosing to pick out an individual with whom one has no acquaintance and to compare him to a “stranger with candy who lets school children approach his beat up van” is not a good way to waste space. Perhaps the Stud Life staff should feel less obliged to fill space with text-an advertisement would have undoubtedly been less condescending and uninformative.

Nathan Gutt
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2005

Finding something to do in Iraq

To the editor:

Walking past that giant green monstrosity that is supposed to make us forget that our school doesn’t have a main library, I saw an interesting posting. It read: “No Apathy. No War.”

Apparently, Rose Kowalski also saw this sign. Her column “Students have options other than war” is righteous in inspiration, however lacking in information.

Kowalski claims President Bush is “war-mongering” and values oil over peace. The only war under the Bush administration was in Afghanistan. Surely Kowalski wasn’t against that war, or somehow under the impression that Bush was valuing premium cave real estate over peace. Also, just because we may be going to war with Iraq, does not mean that we are going to set up a giant free-standing fiberglass Amoco sign and call it a day. Bush has constantly stated that if it comes to war, nation-building will follow. If war is forced upon us, it will be a multinational coalition bringing down Saddam Hussein and a multinational coalition putting the country back together again.

Kowalski then speaks about a rally leader who demanded that Boeing let them perform “inspection for weapons of mass destructions.” I can appreciate some level of humor in the attempt, but it lacks any point. The United States can produce weapons of mass destruction (although it has entered in several non-proliferation treaties on its own accord). Iraq, on the other hand, received United Nations sanctions for its invasion of Kuwait, among other things. Despite those sanctions, Iraq has continued doing what it’s always done: build weapons to bully its neighbors and, in time, the world. In fact, Iraq has been found in material breach of 17 U.N. resolutions. It is because Iraq is in complete disregard of the U.N. and poses as such a potentially damaging threat that Bush wants to forcefully disarm Iraq if necessary.

Being patriotic and supporting our President in this challenging time isn’t apathetic. Quite the contrary, succumbing to what has become chic among the left, opposing war in Iraq, is far more apathetic. Don’t be lazy, read the facts. What’s really undermining the U.N.? Is it France’s craving for a global center stage by refuting the U.S.? Is it Russia’s greed to continue arms and oil deals with Iraq in a U.S.-free market? Is it China trying to establish itself as a world power by providing a counter-weight to the U.S.? The U.N. is meant to be an international body preserving international peace. These nations have ulterior motives which inherently undermine the principles of the U.N. and prevent peace from being realized. Do students have options other than war? Definitely. Study. Play IM sports. Join a club. Be grateful you are not being gassed by a truly self-appointed leader.

Diego Chojkier
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2005

Student Life should address more national issues

To the editor:

Though the Assembly Series usually contributes valuable insight to the Washington University Community, the speech given by Judith Miller given on Wednesday served no purpose. Granted, she was great at repeating everything George Bush has said in the past two years (besides the one concession that we shouldn’t go it alone), but she offered no information that would convince me that she was a “renowned expert” on the Middle East. Nor did she live up to the title of her speech “A view from the Middle East.” Rather, she simply talked about how much the world has changed since 9/11 and how vulnerable all of us were. These are things I already know, yet somehow her saying these things coupled with her “expertise” impelled people to stand up and ask her for advice as if she was going to solve all the problems of the world. If we want to bring journalists to speak, they should speak about journalism and not act as a front for the dismal one-liners of the mainstream media. Journalists could talk about their expereriences abroad, yet Judith only spent about three minutes on this issue. Maybe a better title of her speech would have been “A view from the couch of an American watching CNN.”

I think that Student Life should be aware of the narrow focus of the mainstream media and people like Judith Miller. Though events on campus are important, most people don’t care about how people feel about housing rules or research on cats. I’m aware of several articles that have been turned down because they were not connected to the Wash U community, but I think maybe some good newswriting and op-eds focusing on foreign policy, instead of how we should have a D-I sport or your weekly moral reminder, could educate students far better than the mainstream media.

Jeff Holman
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2005

Alyssa Gregory

Roll over and play dead. While we typically associate this phrase with a somewhat distasteful dog trick, it is surprisingly relevant to college students around the nation, including those at Washington University. Except now it’s not a game, and real people’s lives are at stake.

If you are part of an athletic team or other university-affiliated group that uses 15-passenger vans for transportation, there are some serious safety concerns you should be aware of. Rollover accidents are extremely common in these large vans, and they are frequently fatal. Because of the extreme safety risks posed by these vehicles, WU should no longer offer or sanction their use for school events.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, over one third of the single vehicle accidents involving 15-passenger vans with 10 or more occupants were rollovers. The risk of rollover increases as the van is loaded closer to capacity because the center of gravity shifts in such a way as to make the event more likely.

There is already a law on the books from 1974 which prohibits the transportation of school-aged children (high school and younger) in 15-passenger vans. The safety concerns are great enough that the government prohibits their use for school children, yet WU allows its students to use them.

As mentioned in today’s news article, over the month and a half period from Dec. 29, 1999 to Feb. 10, 2000, students from DePaul University; Kenyon College; University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh; Urbana College of Urbana, Ohio; and Prairie View A&M University were involved in crashes with 15-passenger vans. Some of these were fatal.

The vans are unsafe and WU should no longer make them available for student transportation. Residential Life recently switched from 15-passenger vans to smaller ones that are safer. However, other areas of the university have not yet followed suit by prohibiting their use.

According to Paul Landgraf, WU safety coordinator, despite reviews of safety, “The vast majority of schools are continuing to use the vehicles for travel but require safety training and qualification of drivers before they get behind the wheel.”

While regulations are strict regarding who can drive these vans, even experienced drivers can do little to combat the laws of physics on a rainy day. The government has collected overwhelming evidence concerning the safety of these vans. Why WU and other schools would continue to allow their use is puzzling.

Instead of slapping on a few more rules about who can use the vans, WU needs to make the decision to disallow their use entirely. To do otherwise is to disregard the safety of students, or to at best lump student safety into categories of acceptable risk.

WU has been fortunate not to have lost students due to 15-passenger vans crashing. However, the track record at countless other universities across the nation should be evidence enough that something has to change. Hopefully the university will come to its senses soon and ban 15-passenger vans from student transportation before a WU student dies in one.

Many options other than 15-passenger vans are available. Residential Life has switched to smaller minivans which are safer, and which students feel more comfortable riding and driving in. Enterprise, the company that rents vehicles to WU students, also has other vans in its inventory besides the 15-passenger variety. Enterprise currently rents vans according to regulations imposed by the Office of Student Activities. Instead of merely regulating their use, which implies a university endorsement of their safety, WU should take the next step and eliminate them from the options students have when seeking transportation.

Students can take initiative in enacting this change. Refusing to rent or ride in 15-passenger vans will not only do more to ensure your own safety, but it will send a message to the university that you do not support its endorsement of these dangerous vans.

If enough students refuse to use 15-passenger vans, if enough people publicly protest the university’s endorsement of them, then maybe somebody won’t have to die in one to make WU pay attention.