This kind of humor can't please everyone
Regarding 'Joke oped sparks ire, controversy' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
This is humor at the edge. This story reminds one of the film "Borat," in which Sasha Baron Cohen, himself a Jew, satirizes anti-Semitism by showing an absurdly ignorant anti-Semite with hilarious fantasies about Jews. Some in the Jewish community, however, felt the film would add to, rather than expose as absurd, the stereotypes that some filmgoers have regarding the Jewish community. While many of my Jewish friends therefore found the film offensive, others celebrated it. The film won at the Golden Globe awards, even though I personally did not enjoy it, and my wife walked out in the middle of it. The writers take their chances when they engage in this type of humor, and they will not please every reader.
Owen Mathieu, Jr. '66
Publicly recognize your poor judgment
Regarding 'Editors' note' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
The problem is not, as the 'Prince' editors write, that critics of the column, "Princeton University is racist against me" (Wednesday, Jan. 17, 2007) "do not recognize its purpose." I and others fully understand what the column tried to do, but it was poorly executed (Borat you're not), and it crossed the line between satirizing stereotypes and exploiting them for cheap laughs — which is also perhaps the difference between laughing at racism and laughing with it.
While I'm glad the editors "regret having upset some" of the 'Prince's' readers, I'd rather you recognize your poor judgment and apologize for it. This is not a case of a few hypersensitive students. There is real anger and disappointment out there over this, and you should consider trying to understand where that comes from rather than simply writing off your critics as not getting the joke.
Dale Ho '99
Over-the-top reaction is disappointing
Regarding 'Joke oped sparks ire, controversy' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
I was surprised and a little disappointed by the over-the-top reaction many people have had to the "Asian Stereotype" joke oped in Thursday's issue of The Daily Princetonian. Enough already, guys, it was a joke. A joke with a disclaimer printed underneath it that said "This is the Daily Princetonian's annual joke issue. Don't take anything seriously." A joke that was printed in an entire newspaper of jokes, mocking tons of different people. The thing about appealing to completely outrageous stereotypes is, it's obvious that you're kidding. By protesting what was so clearly not meant to be offensive, you trivialize the fact that there is real racism out there, things that are more worth protesting than a fake 'Prince' oped. Everybody, Asian or not, should stop taking themselves so unrelentingly seriously. What happened to everyone's sense of humor and their ability to laugh at themselves? Lighten up.
Emma Shoucair '07
Joke oped inexcusable
'Princeton University is racist against me'As a Princeton alum, I am asked from time to time whether my alma mater is actually the out-of-touch bastion of elitism many believe it to be. I do my best to dispel my non-Princetonian friends of such a notion, because I believe it to be untrue. Articles such as this one, however, do not help my cause.
I know very little about Li and his case against Princeton. It may well be that his accusations are wholly without merit. That does not excuse, however, The Daily Princetonian from publishing this disgusting mockery of Li and his grievances. Joke or no joke, such stereotype-laden language does nothing but undermine the University's position in this case and tarnish its reputation among outside observers.
Want to convince us that Princeton does not discriminate against Asian-Americans? Try publishing articles about them that aren't so offensive. That might be a start.
Michael Coenen '05
'Prince' is avoiding its responsibilities
Regarding 'Editors' note' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
I was somewhat shocked to read the original "joke" oped piece poking fun of Jian Li. I felt that the attempt at satire was a poor one, and that it was unnecessary to resort to old stereotypes about Asian-Americaness.
The response of your editorial board in today's Daily Princetonian, however, made me even sadder. I'm perfectly willing to concede that there was no malicious intent involved in publishing the original piece. But there is a difference between discriminatory intent and discriminatory impact. And, so far, I have seen no public taking of responsibility for the actual offense caused.
While I do not advocate a system of government by the offended — that is, I don't think that everyone who happens to be offended by something should be given whatever recompense they want — I do think that proper recognition of the offense caused is the first step in enabling a fruitful discussion about race, stereotypes and journalistic responsibility. The current position of the board seems designed to avoid responsibility, which can only have the effect of further alienating those who took offense.
I hope to see more productive steps taken by the editorial board in the near future.
Christina Keddie '03
It's not easy being funny
Regarding 'Joke oped sparks ire, controversy' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
I apologize on behalf of our student body to the entire staff of the 'Prince.' So, you wrote a joke oped that wasn't funny. Whatever. You were obviously trying to be and failed. This whole controversy is ridiculous; most have conceded the point that had the oped been funny, it would not be controversial. Thus, the problem is not racism, but a poorly written op-ed. Suck it up, Princeton. It's not as easy as it looks to be funny on a deadline.
Jon Feyer '09
'Prince' has promoted thoughts on race
Regarding 'Joke oped sparks ire, controversy' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
I personally am not offended by the joke oped that was run, and I know that the editors did not mean to do anyone harm in the article. I can see how other people might be offended by the article. When The Daily Princetonian ran the article detailing Jian Li's actual lawsuit, however, was there that much talk about the issue as there is now? The article was simply read in passing by most people and forgotten about soon after. By running the joke oped, the 'Prince' has done a good job in accomplishing what it set out to do: To promote serious thought regarding race and diversity.
Cindy Chou '07
Watch the Colbert Report
Regarding 'Joke oped sparks ire, controversy' (Friday, Jan. 19, 2007):
I think the people who are complaining about the article that was written by 'Lian Ji' are completely missing the point of humor. In no way was this supposed to reflect how any of the authors of the article really felt. Just because a subject is controversial does not mean it should be off-limits. Seriously, it was a joke. For a lesson in reading between the lines, I refer everyone to the Colbert Report.
Matthew Hunter '07
Thanks for creating an actual debate on race
'Princeton University is racist against me'Two Fridays ago, Polly, the Korean manicurist from NBC's show "Las Vegas", aired her boy troubles on national television. "Chou Hu leave me. Take magic finger and walk out door. I say something about marriage. He flip out like time I put fist in bad place. Get stuck."
Lest one think Polly is an individual who has but a uniquely explorative penchant for carnal pleasures, she has another conversation with her supervisor, Sam, later in the episode. Polly: "I lose will to work." Sam: "You're Korean." Polly: "Hard to believe. I know. No tell parents."
If such racist portrayals are the common currency of primetime entertainment, why is The Daily Princetonian so derided for minting their own, Ivy League brand of stereotypes? People believe Princetonians are more virtuous than the common folk. We don't fudge our way around the public black market of mundane sin. Rather, we go to work at Morgan Stanley (er ... make that Goldman Sachs), not Enron.
I support the 'Prince's' decision to publish the joke oped. It is naive for us to believe that we are somehow above addressing racism, that the students who study here don't need to talk about racist attitudes. I thank the 'Prince' for bringing a long overdue discussion on racism to the table. Good humor is edgy humor. The best humor is humor that will stimulate intelligent, open conversation.
Marcus Lampert '07
The 'Prince' board exercised poor judgement
'Princeton University is racist against me'Last week, the 130th Daily Princetonian managing board exercised poor judgment by releasing a "joke" issue that contained particularly offensive and hurtful material. The editors apologized, but in at least one case argued they were prompting dialogue. Dialogue is a healthy aspect of liberal education, but we believe there are more productive ways to engage an academic community than to demean some of its members. We ask all students who write for publication to anticipate the consequences of their editorial decisions and to ensure that their expressions are respectful to our community.
The 'Prince' might want us to believe that the repulsive, doctored photo of our president, for instance, was merely off-color humor in a culture saturated by such images. They might want us to think it's fine to use offensive and derogatory stereotypes as satire if members of the targeted ethnic group help author them. As has been evidenced by a chorus of disapproving letters, this naïve strategy backfired and has undermined Princeton's ongoing and determined efforts to be a more inclusive and diverse community, to remedy outmoded negative stereotypes, and to establish a climate in which community members of all ethnicities feel welcomed, respected and valued.
Some view this unfortunate incident as a campus setback for women's and civil rights. Others view it as confirmation of a lack of progress in these areas. We view this as an opportunity for students to think deeply about what they are learning at Princeton and about how they will manifest their leadership, both now and when they leave this campus.
The 'Prince' is not a joke magazine but a reputable journalistic vehicle and, as such, has a responsibility to uphold its own established standards in all of its endeavors. The editors' apology is an acknowledgment that the column caused unnecessary and unintended harm, which they regret, but the harm has been caused nonetheless. We applaud the plan of the Asian American Students Association, the 'Prince' and others to turn this unfortunate incident into an opportunity for campus dialogue and learning and for a renewed commitment by all of us to a more inclusive and respectful campus community. Janet Smith Dickerson Vice President for Campus Life
Kathleen Deignan Dean of Undergraduate Students
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.