Spirit isn't just football
To the editor,
My letter is in response to Mr. Smith's editorial on school spirit.
Interesting commentary from a religious studies major.
It never ceases to amaze me how far our fellow college students go to make themselves look ignorant. Did Mr. Smith ever contemplate that many of us are here for educational purposes? Yes its true. And when did "whupping the piss outta USC" become the pinnacle of the semester? I wouldn't say this school lacks spirit. Au contraire. It's great if the football team does well because that means more money for the university as a whole. They work really hard and have my respect. Additionally, I think that athletes get plenty of recognition, and more so than those getting straight A's in nuclear physics... hmmmm.
What gives you the right to criticize your peers if they aren't totally stoked on the football team's latest victory? Perhaps they are more concerned with mid-terms looming on the horizon. School spirit doesn't lie solely in how many beers you drink during a game nor how well you can use curse words to express your spirit. School spirit can be expressed in many ways.
Proud to be a wildcat - only different.
Laura Beer
Pharmacology and toxicology graduate student
Kudos for editorial
To the editor,
I wanted to say thank you for the "Screwing the People: Network News and the Presidential Election in America" piece. It said what I have been thinking, and said it rather eloquently.
Having been a reporter in both print and broadcast, and having been a "flack" for a congressional campaign, I might view the media and the politicians dance a little differently than most. Seeing the national and local coverage that comes from a need to entertain instead of a need to inform has terminated the respect I once held for the profession.
Light-hearted banter has replaced substance, and mayhem has replaced less spectacular issues.
The two most prominent deficiencies in this year's campaign coverage are (I think) the frantic pronouncements of the minuscule leads in the polls, and the lack of response to the verbal stumbling so prevalent in the rhetoric. (The stance on the issues held by these candidates are quite definite and reflect the split in ideology in America's two-party system today). You covered the first topic in your article. The second still perplexes me.
Why did the media make such a point of reporting all the gaffes of Dan Quayle and yet is so unresponsive to the numerous similar type of quotes from George W. Bush? Is our standard of communication lower for the presidential candidate than it is for the vice-presidential? Have our expectations been lowered so much that we take it for granted that someone who can not complete a proper sentence or a complete thought is still a viable candidate for our nation's highest office? Have we unconsciously taken it upon ourselves to provide an interpretation when something comes out incoherent, even though it may be at odds with the speaker's intent? What a dangerous habit.
I still believe that the responsibility of the media is to inform the public of things that have a bearing on their well being. I also feel that the information should be balanced and non-judgmental. In addition, I think that it is responsible journalism to seek out information and not expect that the only news source is either the wire services or the daily newspaper.
Thank you for supplying a measure of good journalism to my day. It was unexpected but welcomed and far surpassed the level usually seen in any publication, much less a school paper.
Carolyn Staggs
Staff member, East Asian studies
