Sorry, readers. It's just that I found this new enemy that's so vile, so repugnant, that I had to abandon my original plans to write an engaging little piece that would have brought a smile to some homesick freshman girl's face while she ate her cottage cheese and honeydew wedges for breakfast in Carmichael. Instead, today's target is the very publication you are reading. That's right: I propose a ban on the Tufts Daily.
The Tufts Daily is bad not just because it wastes paper in printing far too many copies. My beef runs deeper than that. For me, it is a constant reminder of Tufts' affinity for mediocrity. It instills in us the very traits that our campus was supposed to expunge. It breeds tendencies to assume that whatever is printed is fact, which enslaves us to others' versions of reality. Overriding these urges becomes even more difficult when a publication exists in a widely distributed, neatly formatted hard copy. But if we never question the work of amateur writers who cover inconsequential issues that affect only 5,200 undergraduates within a tiny campus, how will we question issues when they actually matter?
Our complacency is equally eminent in the way we tolerate our representative newspaper's underpinning structure. If we compare the Daily to other campus organizations, we see that the latter acquire their funding from the student activity fee that is tacked on to our tuition. Thus, every student is connected to every student organization. So, even if I think an organization is stupid (Strategic Gaming Society), pointless (Jumbo Janitor Alliance) or downright dangerous (Students Promoting Equality, Awareness and Compassion, or SPEAC — formerly known as BEATBias), I can rightfully infiltrate it, write about it and criticize it because I supply their capital. By funding these clubs, the student body asserts its control over them, giving you the right to hold them accountable for wrongdoing.
However, the Tufts Daily proudly stands apart from these student−dependent organizations. They face no budgetary obstacles, nor any student oversight, unless you consider the public editor a significant force. But that'd be the equivalent of labeling Larry and Adele a cute couple — it's nice to think, but in the back of your head you know it is false.
This disconnect from our own student newspaper lets the organization run rampant with useless content, attempting to cover everything that happens at Tufts, while other student publications fight over what remains: nerdy audiences and trivial topics. This process is self−sustaining so long as the university is open to giving the Daily another deadline−free loan.
Because the Daily holds a monopoly over student publications, the incentive to write quality articles plummets. Articles covering on−campus events like Spring Fling and Fall Ball devolve into an echo chamber of administrators making vague statements with a smattering of comments from students whose only source of authority is being a Tufts student. And speaking of echo chambers, let's not forget the Tufts Community Union Senate and the coverage it receives. Just last week the Daily endorsed abstaining on a referendum that further institutionalizes segregation. As a result, 149 kids abstained, and Tufts was once again made worse by an organization that does not know what is best for Tufts.
We must ban the Tufts Daily because it is low quality. It is filled with baseless opinions, rambling columns and inherent assumptions that it represents the student body. It abuses its power by relying on emotional appeals and popular support without ever demonstrating why it should be our de facto voice. They also have word limits, which are bad because
--
CJ Saraceno is a senior majoring in political science. He can be reached at Christopher.Saraceno@tufts.edu.
