In high school, one of the most difficult lessons I had to learn as an opinion columnist was to anticipate the intensity of readers' reactions. After each of my articles was published online, I incessantly clicked on my browser's refresh button throughout the day, scanning the bottom of the page for additional comments that may have appeared since my last visit. This tick of mine did not diminish after my transition into The Dartmouth's opinion page, which generates much, if not most, of the reader response found on The D's website. Despite the wide variety of impassioned commentary located beneath the articles, The D's online comment system faces limitations that render in-depth discussions difficult to carry out.
For example, according to The D's online policy, unless a reader comments using his Dartmouth Name Directory account, his statement is subject to approval by an editor. Such controlled delays can create a slow and halting flow of discussion hardly an ideal forum for a dynamic, candid dialogue.
Enter Bored at Baker, infamous for its anonymous and oft taboo conversation topics such as sex, race and Greek life gossip. The site is but one of several campus-specific "Bored at" sites created by Columbia graduate Jonathan Pappas, aka "Jae Daemon." Bored at Baker can be viewed as "simple lines of logical code" that connect "the uncontaminated thoughts of the people around you," Pappas wrote in an e-mail.
The description seems fitting, given that Bored at Baker has proven to be a consistent medium for raw, unrestrained discussions. Despite administrative disapproval and multiple temporary shutdowns, Bored at Baker has endured to provide a virtual glimpse into Dartmouth's collective inner zeitgeist.
Bored at Baker's influence has grown to such an extent that it could be considered Dartmouth's alternative social microcosm. The anonymity granted to commentors on Bored at Baker allows its users to express their opinions without restraint, which was especially evident over winter break, when The D published an article online that reported the arrest of a Dartmouth student on felony drug charges. The D's decision to publish the student's identity unleashed a torrent of outraged reactions among Bored at Baker users, whose discussions touched upon a number of associated topics, including numerous comments that questioned the journalistic integrity of the reporter and criticized the quality of the newspaper. Observations ranged from cautionary hypothetical questions such as, "Is it really worth it to ruin someone's entire future by publishing it all over the internet?" to outright accusations of inadequacy: "The ... scandal is another example of the horrible reporting and reprehensible editorial decisions that characterize The Dartmouth."
I was disappointed to discover that despite signs of widespread student disapproval on Bored at Baker, no one submitted a rationally argued letter to the editor over the course of winter break. From what I had observed on Bored at Baker, I had expected a modest smattering of people to use The D's opinion page as a forum where they would criticize The D's editorial decision. Doing so would have provided invaluable feedback and critiques that might have encouraged The D's editorial board to reevaluate its future policy.
While I understand that members of Bored at Baker may not be representative of the entire Dartmouth population, their vast pool of anonymous and often brutally frank comments may produce a fruitful critique of The D's policies. I believe that The D news staff is fully committed to its duty to inform the Dartmouth community, but ultimately, The D's writers and editors are human and therefore prone to err. The quest to better this age-old publication must be a mutual undertaking between the writers and the readers. If posters on Bored at Baker are serious about their complaints, they should make an effort to communicate these concerns directly to The D, moving the discussion off an anonymous website and introducing a measure of accountability in the process.
