Over the course of a recent weekend, Dartmouth hosted the biggest meeting of Ivy League student environmentalists that has ever taken place at the College, with the fourth-annual Greening of the Ivies conference. This event, which brought together environmental representatives from Ivy League schools to coordinate collective actions and initiatives, was the culmination of the efforts of many Dartmouth students and months of organizing. The conference chairpersons, Jeffrey Kemnitz '03 and Elizabeth Topping '02, helped organize talks, discussions, workshops, housing, dinners, tours and recreational activities.
Guests at the Conference included Sen. Bob Smith, National Parks representative Bill Laitner, Costa Rican coffee-cooperative manager Carlos Murillo, Green Mountain Coffee's public relations director Rick Peyser, Sierra Student Coalition activist Dave Westman, green building architect Dan LeBlanc, the American Lands Alliance's northern organizer John Demos and environmental author and Dartmouth english professor Terry Osborne.
By the end of the conference, the assembled student participants had agreed on three social and environmental initiatives -- immediate and long-term -- that all Ivy League schools would work on collectively during the coming year before the next conference.
Did you see any the coverage of the conference in The Dartmouth? No? That's because there was none.
Oh, sorry, you're right. Let's be fair here: there was mention of the event hidden in the middle of another article about flag protesting at Hanover High School in the middle pages of the paper. The mention was exactly 139 words long -- and that is a generous word count.
When The Dartmouth declined to cover the Greening of the Ivies conference, it failed to live up to its principles as delineated by its editorial in this year's first issue. In the Jan. 3 editorial, The Dartmouth writes:
"Under the 2003 Directorate, The Dartmouth will do its part to foster this understanding by bringing you coverage that challenges the boundaries of Dartmouth news. As a central source of information, we have the unique ability to pursue questions that might otherwise go unasked. We also have the responsibility to provide a wide range of voices so that readers can better grasp the complexity of their world."
While having "the unique ability to pursue questions that might otherwise go unasked," The Dartmouth editorial board decided very deliberately to not ask the questions at all. The news editors were asked about covering the event on several occasions by one of their own reporters, but they said no and instead choose for their front page an article on faculty and staff parking, an article that could have run just as effectively any other day of the week. If The Dartmouth is going to say that there was "a busy political weekend at the College" and then not include adequate coverage of a three-day conference of 100 student environmentalists, I think the paper should reassess its mission statement.
The Dartmouth's choice to pass on covering the conference was a slap in the face to many students and their efforts to gain more awareness of their concerns and noteworthy accomplishments. The newspaper was notified well in advance of the conference dates and then again when Sen. Bob Smith, the ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, agreed to come as a special guest. What were the initiatives that came out of the conference, anyway? You'll have to look at the Jan. 18 issue of an Upper Valley publication to find out.
As a "central source of information" on campus, The Dartmouth's most important service to the school is to provide a forum for student concerns and issues and to cover campus-related events. Shouldn't this include a news event that featured a U.S. senator, representatives from major environmental concerns, and 100 students from Ivy League universities? The paper's decision not to run a story on the conference -- for whatever reason -- reflects an inexcusable lack of judgement that runs against the paper's fundamental raison d'tre. Instead of challenging the boundaries of Dartmouth news, the paper retreated. Instead of fulfilling their "responsibility to provide a wide range of voices," they left it up to someone else.
