Joke op-ed debated at joint forum

Discussion struck a measured tone last night when around 40 people gathered in Dodds Auditorium to talk about self-segregation, eating clubs and the overall Asian-American experience on campus.

The forum — which was billed by organizers as an opportunity for Asian Americans to voice their thoughts on all aspects of campus life — fluctuated between criticism of a fake column published in The Daily Princetonian and discussion of larger issues of campus race relations.

The meeting, cosponsored by the Asian American Students Association (AASA) and the 'Prince,' was organized after the newspaper ran a column in its annual joke issue that relied heavily on Asian stereotypes. The piece satirized Jian Li, an applicant who was waitlisted at Princeton and has filed a civil rights complaint charging that the University discriminated against him because he is Asian.

Outdoor Action Director Rick Curtis '79 said the column struck a sensitive spot in a society still grappling with issues of racism. "For some people it was like sticking a hot nail into a nerve," he said.

Along with representatives from AASA and the 'Prince,' the panel included a moderator from the campus group Sustained Dialogue and Interclub Council graduate adviser Tim Prugar '06. USG president Rob Biederman '08 did not attend, despite being scheduled to participate.

'A lack of judgment'

The column, written by members of the 'Prince's' outgoing managing board and published with the byline "Lian Ji," was written in broken English and referred to stereotypes such as "yellow fever" and dog-eating.

It sparked discussion on and off campus, with the debate focusing on whether elite universities discriminate against Asian-American students in admissions and whether students who are admitted face bias on campus.

"It was an extraordinarily poor job," University trustee Y.S. Chi '83 said of the column, which drew criticism from some members of University's minority groups and administration, as well as national media and bloggers.

"We recognized that there was a lack of judgment," former 'Prince' editor-in-chief Chanakya Sethi '07 said at the forum. He explained that "the 'Prince' was really taking affirmative steps" from the moment readers began expressing opposition to the article.

Following publication of the article, the 'Prince' published an editors' note expressing regret for having upset readers.

Some in attendance doubted the sincerity of the paper's apology. Mo Chen '80 said that she "did not get a sense of remorsefulness" from the 'Prince's' reaction. "Your letters of apology did not seem like an apology," Chen said.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

But others said they thought criticism of the column was overblown.

"I thought the initial reaction to the article was extreme," Andrew Kim '10 said. "To blow up the poorly written article ... into the images we have of racism also contributed to making this a much bigger issue than it needed to be."

Many in the audience voiced concern over the article's wide-ranging consequences.

Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne said that the column served to "reinforce the stereotypes" of the University as intolerant of some groups, adding that some still consider Princeton to be an anti-Semitic institution.

Chi echoed Dunne's remarks. "[For] people who don't know much about Princeton," he said, "you have just reinforced the image of Princeton as white and rich."

Sethi sidestepped a question from the audience over whether, in retrospect, the 'Prince' would still have published the article. But he said the paper could not "stand by an article that upset that many readers."

'Painful lessons'

"This was a teachable moment," Curtis said. "We learned through what happened how painful even the best intentions can be. Taking the next step is to think more broadly how we can communicate with one-another."

Makeba Clay, the Director of the Carl A. Fields Center for Equality and Cultural Understanding, said she took issue not only with the controversial column but with the entire concept behind the 'Prince's' joke issue. "I think what I walked away with after reading most of the entire issue was a feeling that racism, homophobia and gender bias are issues that we are still grappling with in a very real way," she said.

Despite his criticism of the 'Prince,' Chi praised the forum and the campus community's willingness to engage in a dialogue about race.

"We've still got a long way to go, but there is a lot to celebrate here," he said. "Something like this helps — it's a great first step — but it has to keep going."

"It's not just about Asian-Americans," he added. "It's about every minority group here on campus."