On what has not been published

I used to wonder how it could be possible that the space in our daily paper could be filled consistently with editorials about pet dogs or debates on the character of Kenny or Butters from South Park. I knew that students were all engaged in more substantive activities and discussions than those being represented in print, so the abundance of apparent space fillers in the paper confused me. By space fillers I mean front page articles dedicated to several students who are legacies (a topic far from newsworthy as legacies make up approximately 11.4 percent of the class of '02 alone!), several students with off-campus jobs, or the fact that some people live together for four years on campus. Until recently, I assumed that the people doing noteworthy things were too busy to write about them for the newspaper or notify a journalist of what they had accomplished. After two struggles to get items published, however, I have realized that there isn't a general student apathy concerning the newspaper; rather, the superfluous articles and letters to the editor that do get printed are consciously selected by the editors over other options.

The first problem I ran into has to do with the treatment of Club Sports. Last spring the Equestrian Team won the title of Reserve Champions at the Ivy League Horse Show and I tried to get a small article written recognizing that feat. Because the sports section devotes a small paragraph to each club sport twice a year, however, I was put off. This spring, one of our riders accomplished an even bigger achievement — Kelly Wells '03 qualified for and will compete at Nationals on May 3-5. In my personal opinion, a student specifically representing Princeton University at the National competition of any sport deserves, at the least, an article noticing that success in the Prince. The sports section, however, claimed to be too full of Varsity articles at this time of year to mention it. Thanks to a friend of mine who happens to be in a position of authority on staff, we were able to get an article acknowledging Kelly's accomplishments — but she had to write it herself.

A second piece that did not run was not written by me, but I proofed it for the author and recognized it as a touching, well-written editorial. Sent in two times and over one month ago, the piece discussed the Arts Alive program and the benefits of serving Princeton beyond our occasionally limited campus sphere (in " The Rest of the World," according to our daily page of non-Princeton news). Not only did its author not receive a reply from any member of the Prince staff, but the article has yet to run while daily editorials criticizing campus leisure time or whining about writing a junior paper have been printed.

Maybe this letter will actually get printed to let me have my two cents and moment to shine in the Daily Princetonian. I'm really not a bitter want-to-be columnist or self-promoter which should be evident in that the items I wanted published concerned my fellow teammate and a friend whose letter got refused. I'd also like to add that I think that many of the Prince's articles are well written, well selected and justified. I certainly don't want to criticize the paper as a whole. Nevertheless, it truly concerns me that an outsider picking up our paper might not know the truth that I know — that Princeton is home to people doing amazing things and trying to change the world. Instead, they might only see us as having nothing better to talk about than Kenny, our dogs, or working on Nassau Street. That would be a shame. Emily Mitchell '03