Why is it that when underrepresented students on campus take the initiative to bring their issues into the mainstream College dialogue they are automatically dismissed as rabble-rousers?
The Dartmouth's egregiously inadequate news and editorial coverage of Tim Andreadis '07's overwhelming victory in the Student Assembly election is an insult to the 1,025 voters who wrote him in as their first choice for student body president.
Andreadis was able to form a coalition of different communities on campus and highlight under-discussed yet pressing issues, such as sexual assault and rates of minority/women faculty retention. According to Michael Belinsky '08's op-ed column, Andreadis' win may have been attributable to his "[winning] the 'Anti-D' vote by creating a perception of mass discontent with The Dartmouth" -- an incredible feat of illusion, if true ("An Analysis of the SA Election," April 27). In fact, Belinsky's analysis is self-contradictory: either a widespread dissatisfaction with The Dartmouth exists or it does not, but Andreadis obviously could not simultaneously be hyping it up from nothing and capitalizing on its preexistence.
Be that as it may, the actual reason why a majority of student voters rallied behind Andreadis is that he was the first candidate in recent memory to address actual issues critical to the Dartmouth community and not just proffer banal and amorphous desires to "save Tubestock" or "strengthen Greek life."
In The Dartmouth Editorial Board's Verbum Ultimum ("A Call to Overhaul Student Assembly," April 25), The Dartmouth conceded that "there are certainly important issues to debate" but found Tim's campaigning "inappropriate and divisive." Divisive? Andreadis built an unprecedented coalition on campus, comprised of groups which in many cases were under one umbrella for the first time.
Also mystifying was the inclusion of Robert Butts's op-ed, ("A Platform I'd Vote for," April 27), in which he claims that "two things are certain ... One, turnout in the election will be laughably low. And two ... it won't make a damn bit of difference for Dartmouth students." One of these assertions, by the time of the article's publication, was empirically false. The other is predicated upon the disparate campaigns being run on platforms involving ESPN-U or "protect[ing] the Greeks from 'the menace.'" This assumption is also demonstrably false. Either Butts composed his piece weeks in advance of the election (before Andreadis' run) or his head was in the sand throughout: either way, its publication was an embarrassment to him and The Dartmouth in general.
The Dartmouth also printed the ridiculous rhetorical meme accusing Andreadis of "fear-mongering" in an April 28 op-ed titled "Campaigning and Statistics," written by Nicholas Martin '07. Much has been made of the 17 percent statistic representing an undergraduate woman's chance of being sexually assaulted during her Dartmouth career, but two things are important to remember. One: the statistic was derived from a number originally published by The Dartmouth itself ("Many rape incidents occur yearly at College," Feb. 6). Two: The Dartmouth was quoting Leah Prescott, Coordinator of Dartmouth's Sexual Assault Awareness Program. Do the individuals questioning the 17 percent statistic believe Prescott to be incompetent? Do they believe her to be trying to deceive them? Or are they having problems with the simple math?
In "A Call to Overhaul Student Assembly" (April 25), The Dartmouth's Editorial Board characterized Andreadis' mass blitz, titled "Dartmouth is in TROUBLE," as "alarmist" and "inflammatory." But in what context would a discussion of sexual assault be conducted in a pleasant demeanor? Though students may be generally satisfied on campus, this is no excuse to ignore the serious problems that do exist. The Editorial Board's tactics wasted an opportunity to explore the actual issues which Andreadis' campaign raised, and instead focused on adopting an untenable defensive posture.
For all of the talk about apathetic Dartmouth students, my own face-to-face campaigning with students from a variety of different communities, to say nothing of the election results themselves, showed me that there are many students who care about making their school stronger and, if given a chance, will take a stand. Andreadis' campaign has finally instigated a much needed dialogue in a more public forum and demonstrates how women's and minority issues are not limited to those groups. His presidency gives me and countless other students hope for a stronger and more inclusive Dartmouth.
