In late March, a group of students from the Princeton Committee on Palestine proposed a student-wide referendum related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Referendum No. 3 called on the University to “immediately halt usage of Caterpillar machinery in all ongoing campus construction projects given the violent role that Caterpillar machinery has played in the mass demotion of Palestinian homes, the murder of Palestinians and other innocent people.” 

Unsurprisingly, the referendum caught the attention of national outlets and organizations. In fact, as ‘Prince’ reporter Paige Cromley found, national pro-Israel groups spent more than $1,000 in an attempt to defeat the referendum. 

But when results were announced on April 14, the controversy surrounding the referendum did not come to an end; instead, a new conflict arose. 1,124 students voted in favor of the referendum, 1,029 students voted no, and 424 abstained. Excluding the abstentions, as per the Appendix D of USG Constitution, would have meant that the referendum passed. Including abstentions in the vote totals, however, would have meant that the referendum did not attain a majority. USG declined to certify the results of the referendum, while they resolved allegations of miscommunication between student leaders on the nature of abstentions. 

National pro-Israel news outlets and organizations claimed that the referendum failed, while students affiliated with the Princeton Committee on Palestine maintained that they had won the referendum. Eventually the USG Senate hatched a compromise: they recognized that “by its Constitution, ‘with a majority of student votes, Referendum 3 passes,’” but refused to issue a referendum endorsement statement to the University administration. 

If the twists and turns of the Referendum No. 3 saga strike you as confusing, you are not alone.  But ‘Prince’ reporters and editors Annie Rupertus, Drew Somerville, Katherine Dailey, and Paige Cromley offered clarity. While disinformation spread, and the story was botched by national outlets, our local, small community newspaper offered incisive, fact-driven reporting. 

— Zachariah

This year, Isabel Rodrigues and Naomi Hess, chair and assistant chair of the accessibility working group, led the paper in implementing a standardized audio narration at the top of each of our articles. Introducing the text-to-speech reader was an invaluable step in expanding how the ‘Prince’ reaches members of our community, allowing us to better fulfill our obligations as Princeton’s paper of record.

While expanding the accessibility of our coverage, Rodrigues, Hess, and many others have also pushed to represent the very readers we are striving to reach. Hess’ feature on disabled students’ fight for a more inclusive campus — complete with incredible data visualization and powerful anecdotes — epitomizes the strides we have taken to reach and represent more voices on campus, particularly those of marginalized communities.

Redefining how we connect with our community is not a goal isolated to our website. Working with Rodrigues, Head Audience Editor Rowen Gesue set up an alternative text system for all of our Instagram posts. Introducing alternative text is just one example of the year-long efforts of Gesue and others to empathetically and intentionally amplify stories by leveraging our social media, which is often the first platform through which we reach readers.

Rodrigues, Hess, Gesue, and so many others have played an instrumental — and often unseen — role in sharing untold narratives and innovating how they reach our audience. I am unbelievably grateful to have worked with editors and staff who continually push the needle on what it means to be student journalists and filled with hope for the future of the ‘Prince’ as a conduit for campus conversation.

During the summer, Assistant Data Editor Elaine Huang and Head Web Design & Development Editor Anika Maskara informed me of a project in the works: Inspired by The Pudding’s project on The New York Times, the two were working on a data visualization of Princeton history based on a word scrape of the ‘Prince’ archive.

To me, their final project encapsulates so much of what gives me pride in how far we’ve come. It’s a testament to what can happen when someone brings their unique talents to the table and receives the support necessary to execute their vision. Decade by decade, the project unravels aspects of the University’s history that should inform the way we see campus today. And using breathtaking data visualization and original web design, it pushes the paper to new heights as a real 21st century media outlet.

“140 Years of Princeton History” exemplifies the bold and exhausting work that defined so many of the projects authored within the last year, from the data staff’s efforts in publishing a first-of-its-kind census of the senior class, to the web design staff’s rush to ensure some of our most important journalism — like Associate News Editor Sandeep Mangat’s rigorous interview with University President Christopher L. Eisgruber ’83 that sparked campus-wide discussions on mental health — receives the visual platform it deserves. I cannot wait to see what the future holds for such innovation at the ‘Prince.’

— Marie-Rose

Some of the most beautiful pieces the ‘Prince’ has published were touched by José Pablo Fernández García — either moving personal reflections he wrote or others’ powerful essays he brought to life through careful editing. One such work that I was particularly proud to see published this year was the collection of pieces elevating Hispanic and Latine voices that José Pablo compiled. 

In his concentrated effort to include voices that have been absent from the pages of the ‘Prince,’ I see a future where this paper is one that everyone can see themselves in. I am proud of what the ‘Prince’ has done under the 146th Board, but I am most excited to see what is to come, with work like José Pablo’s at the center.

Our final print issue of the year entitled “Black Voices: Then, Now, and Forever” focused on highlighting Princeton’s vibrant Black community. Associate Podcast Editor Eden Teshome worked tirelessly to compile an issue that centered Black Princeton. From dance show reviews to a feature on Princeton’s premier African fashion show Sankofa to poignant opinions calling for the University to address the concerns and desires of the Black community — the issue was one of our most powerful to date. 

But my favorite of them all was an op-ed by columnist Ndeye Thioubou offering an introspective reflection on the lack of diversity in our very own institution. Thioubou wrote so powerfully about the inextricable link between the diversity of a newsroom and the quality of its journalism. I have seen this first hand as I have navigated the ‘Prince’ from my time as a first-year News Contributor to a Managing Editor. Diverse lived experiences are crucial to what we do here at the ‘Prince,’ and I am excited to see the progress of recent years continue in the future. When choosing the title of the special issue, we were intentional in ending on the word “forever” rather than something like “tomorrow” or “in the future.” This is not a hollow promise — it is a serious commitment. 

– Omar