RPInsider

I’m not sure about your definition of “respectful.” At least Kara’s question was well prepared and worded. The questions following however, were pretty much phrased as attacks, and were partially uninformed (and not well articulated), which made the student body look like idiots and jerks. That’s exactly why they won’t take us seriously. Because without going through the proper channels of respect, we just look angry and stupid.

Make sure that before you formally address the administration, you know EXACTLY what you are talking about.

And read the Poly for gosh sakes. Don’t rely on word of mouth or blown out of proportion rumors for your information. Check your facts.

Not that I’m defending the administration, because obviously they have a lot to improve upon. However, demanding Fireside Chats is a little excessive.

@Kat
Alright, I’m honestly getting sick of this. This constant sycophantic diatribe that if we don’t use some esoteric procedure to earn the administration’s respect that we’re doing it wrong needs to stop. A good half of Kara’s question was praising Pres. Jackson – not because that’s demonstrating true respect, but because she refuses to answer to anything else. Meanwhile, a good number of students are legitimately upset but are held back by an equally good number of students reiterating the words “proper channels” and “respect” while language programs are eliminated and student pay (RAs, specifically) is cut in half. At what point do we say enough is enough? Is it not obvious yet that paying lip service, as is so frequently demanded, has in fact done nothing of any value?

Keep in mind, also, that the RPI student in its natural habitat has never been known for its social skills. When demanding something, remember of whom you are demanding it.

Furthermore, the Poly has not exactly been covering the latest news. There were rumors for weeks that a large portion of the clinical faculty would not have their contracts renewed (in fact, a question about it was asked at the Knowles Q&A). We now know this to be a fact, but as details have been emerging about this development the pages of the Poly have remained bare. Admittedly, information has been flowing at a pace that a weekly publication could never match (and thankfully we have this blog to fill in the gaps). At the same time, the Poly has failed to do any sort of active investigative journalism to confirm or deny the rumors afloat – rather it simply reports on press releases, statements, and events. People are relying on the rumors and word of mouth because, honestly, that’s where the information actually has been. If that’s to stop, the student media is going to step up its game.

Finally, the “Fireside Chats”, like the weekly emails, were a suggestion for a way to open up the avenues of communication between students and the administration. Calling it a demand is a misrepresentation at best.

@Kat

So if protesting isn’t “a proper channel of respect”, I guess that just makes Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. some sort of disrespectful agitator. Perhaps our nation’s founding fathers were behaving crassly in retrospect when they declared independence from Britain and fought back when troops were sent over to rectify the situation. Am I reading into that right?

In all seriousness, by no means to I wish to call our struggle for greater transparency on campus of equal or greater importance than the civil rights movement or the American struggle for independence; however, one cannot argue that their methods of protest failed to be effective. Yes, protesting may very well initially come off as angry and stupid, as you have so eloquently put it, but when it really comes down to results, there are scant few ways to better get your point across and to bring about action to rectify the situation.

@Paul

“If that’s to stop, the student media is going to step up its game.”

No one can get “facts” if no one can talk to the administration like you claimed above. Facts are reported and rumors are not. If you have a problem, join their staff and do the digging yourself.

@Stay Informed

You quoted me without context, and that is NOT ok. I’m not looking to attack the Poly. I’m responding specifically to what Kat said – to ignore the rumors and to follow what the Poly says. Many rumors have held true even though the Poly has not reported on them, so telling people to use the Poly exclusively is ill-advised. IF we want people to stop listening to rumors and rely on the Poly for fact-finding (or fact confirmation), THEN the Poly needs to be confirming/denying rumors as they come up. However, until such a point is reached that lack of reporting in the Poly means lack of substance to the rumor, asking people to ignore rumors is equivalent to asking them to remain uninformed.

I have no ill-will towards the Poly. I have ill-will to the idea of using any single source of media as the exclusive arbiter of fact. In no way am I saying that the Poly is not a great source of information, and when the Poly does report on something the facts are typically definitive and should be considered as such. I am simply asking that the value of other sources of information – including word-of-mouth – not go unrecognized.

@Paul

Paul, that’s funny, because I seem to remember two very in-depth and beautifully written articles on the language program cuts appearing in that week’s Poly. The members of the student publications care passionately about the cuts in HASS and the literature and language programs. Maybe you should actually read the Poly before you claim they don’t publish something…

Both the Poly and other media sources work very hard to publish the FACTS. The facts that can actually be confirmed and quoted, and not just a bunch of bullshit that is floating around, and is, to be quite frank, just gossip.

While I understand that listening to these rumors is a part of keeping an open mind and ear, counting them as truths, and repeating them as truths not only makes you uninformed, it makes you misinformed. So before you open your mouth, you should confirm what you are saying as true, and also ensure that you understand what exactly you are saying.

Student activism is a beautiful thing. I am so proud to see my peers caring so passionately about these issues. But if you are too angry and too disrespectful to communicate your ideas with Dr. Jackson, then nothing will come of it.

@Kat

The problem of course is that if you respectfully communicate your ideas with Dr. Jackson she ignores them completely. Respect is a two way street and the RPI administration displays an utter lack of respect for its students. When quiet and respectful suggestions fail doesn’t it make sense to pursue a more vocal strategy?

@Kat

I.

The mistake you’re making is in your conception of how the Poly “confirms” a fact.

There’s nothing magical about what the Poly does that gives information a special “confirmed” status. Independent student fact-finders read the same documents and speak with the same staff and faculty members as the Poly staff. The Poly does one thing differently, and relies upon that thing heavily: it asks administration members if something is true. This form of confirmation is inadequate, and can even be harmful, if one is looking for truth.

The Poly’s reporting technique allows the administration to control the message on campus. In choosing what information to confirm, the administration can use the Poly to circulate favorable information. It can also remain silent with regard to unfavorable information, making it unpublishable.

The Poly is very dependent on access to the administration, so there is little motivation to publish particularly critical information. If it angers the administration, it can no longer use the administration as a source of information. Such an occurrence would require the Poly to perform investigative journalism of the sort that student fact-finders have been performing for the last month, but this sort of work is difficult and the Poly would much prefer to continue it’s current style of reporting only on what the administration has said.

Sources inside the Poly have made clear that the current Editor-in-Chief has an explicit policy of keeping a friendly relationship with the administration. This can’t help but color the quality of the Poly’s reporting.

The Poly has very limited column space and has a staff of generalists. This means that not all relevant information is published and what is published relies heavily to the whims of the writers. These writers are not experts in any of the happenings on campus and, as a result, have great difficulty in choosing what information is and is not relevant.

All of these factors lead to a conclusion that the Poly cannot be the only source of “confirmed” information on campus. Very few qualities are unique to the publication, and the ones that are unique greatly weaken the case for its exclusive reliability. Independent student fact-finders can discover new information just as well, without being subject the institutional limitations that chill the dissemination of information that the administration would find unfavorable.

Listen to other sources. There are students working hard to investigate these issues, and their work should not be hand-waved away while the Poly drags its feet, as it always has.

II.

Politeness and respect are not to be confused.

The students act with respect for the administration by criticizing its actions and demanding accountability. They believe that leadership by the administration is essential, but seeks to ensure that its authority, which is derived from the will of the students and faculty, does not grow out of control.

Students only lack politeness towards the administration, and the time for politeness has ended. Students politely asked for changes to administrative policy for years. In return, the students received lies and were categorized as “short-term stakeholders” of little importance. Politeness is only a means to an end and not an end in itself. As politeness has failed to win policy changes, it is time for students to stop being polite and start rudely demanding change.

The only party lacking respect is the administration, as briefly mentioned above. They do not believe that students are capable of understanding the decisions that the administration makes and do not believe the students should have any say in how their own school is managed. Jackson speaks down to students and treats them with contempt. Every time students and faculty have extended an olive branch over the past decade, the administration has slapped it away.

Is change possible if the administration disrespects the students? No. If students start acting politely, will the administration start respecting the students? As the scope of the administration’s disrespect indicates the answer is “certainly not”.

Politeness achieves nothing for students. The administration will not gratuitously give anything to students. If students want change, they must organize and take it for themselves. There is no greater act of respect for RPI in which students can engage.

– An alum with heavy credentials

@Inspector Flying Fox of the Yard

Who needs these unnamed inside sources on the Poly, as you say you have, when you can hear it from the horse’s mouth?

As that EIC who is keeping a “friendly” relationship with the administration, I can say I am confident in our reporting. I would also say “friendly” isn’t as correct a term anyway, as “working relationship.” If we do NOT have an effective working relationship with the administration, we can not the entire story to the student body and come across as biased. Though maybe you wouldn’t mind this as much because it would be the outspoken student group-side being paraded about?

This all, however, does not mean that we can not write editorial pieces that state our opinions, but they are just that … OUR opinions. Students are welcome and encouraged to submit letters to the editor for our opinion section where they can provide that balance that you say we lack in our reporting.

We have balanced reports, that come out of sources ranging from students to administration. In addition to those quoted, we speak with a number of additional sources as background for articles (students, professors, and administration alike), but if they don’t have any authority or proof to speak on a certain issue, we can not report it–it’s false until proven to be true, and I will not be accused of libel so that we can report the RPI rumor mill. That is why we have blogs like this.

We are students, and yes, we don’t always have time for investigative journalism. We are not journalism majors. We don’t do this for money. It is a club and we strive to do the best we can.

And our “unfair reporting” as you’re seeming to claim is certainly NOT because it will anger the administration. Do you know what I speak about in meetings with Cabinet members? No, you don’t. I talk about what’s going on around campus. I give MY OPINIONS to them and discuss with them in person things that, in the past, have typically been discussed in print. Just because I don’t personally call for resignations or say that they are completely wrong on something in an editorial DOES NOT mean I am completely hunky-dorey with something that the administration does… and I think they are aware of my opinions. I do my job, so don’t accuse me of doing otherwise. I’m guessing you haven’t read my latest editorial or you would know that I’m not the administration’s lackey and can certainly disagree with them.

As for news stories, they report what students need to know. If someone gives me a tip with a substantial enough basis for following up on it, I will do so to the greatest extent possible. As a group of 30 students, we can not know every rumor that is circulating. TELL US! I have heard hide nor hair from anyone this semester giving a constructive tip–the student body should fix this.

You can only get so far whining on a blog. As for column space, as long as we are notified by the Sunday before publication any current student or “alum with heavy credentials” such as yourself can write a letter to the editor or my view. Even after that, we will do our damnedest to fit it in. When have you tried to submit one and were denied the space that you are any sort of authority to speak on this?

I will continue to do my job as I see fit, and you can either continue whining anonymously on a blog or take initiative and email me some suggestions or a letter to the editor.

Thanks for the input.

@Cara R

My conclusion was very narrow tailored to the idea that the Poly is not the exclusive source of verified information on campus. The criticisms made of the Poly in my analysis do not apply solely that publication, but are systematic problems in modern news media. The problem of access bias, the problem of generalism, and the watering-down of coverage caused by the resulting tensions can be found in every traditional news publication, from the New York Times to the Troy Record. Your post does an excellent job outlining the limitations of which I was writing and reinforces my point quite well. Thank you.

I would love to read your editorial. Please update the Poly website beyond the second week of February so I might do just that.

@Inspector Flying Fox of the Yard

Oh great, glad I could clear some things up for everyone then.

Working on slowly updating the website … we got behind at some point and unfortunately I can only do so much.