This week's stories:
In the race for Student Government Association President and Vice President, sophomores Brittany McVicker and Molly Cavalier seem to be the stronger candidates. It should be a close race. All of the candidates involved seem to back the same issues, from security and safety to communication with students and administrators. Sophomores Tom Tabaczynski and Adam Campbell, would do a fine job as well. But, a few points make McVicker and Cavalier the better candidates. While Tabaczynski and Campbell have the practical experience to successfully operate SGA and run the student senate, McVicker's and Cavalier's leadership will be pivotal in representing the student body. They have shown their leadership skills in the past two years as Class of 2004 President and Vice President. They may not have as much knowledge of SGA procedures as their opponents, but they have vital experience in working with students. Tabaczynski and Campbell made their wide knowledge of SGA and its operations clear, yet that may not be enough to represent the university. McVicker and Cavalier will adapt to their roles while utilizing the skills they have acquired during their previous leadership experiences. Both parties proved themselves worthy of the position with their solid presence at the debates on Wednesday in the Dresser Auditorium of the Murphy Professional Building. However McVicker and Cavalier projected an image which may appealing to more common St. Bonaventure students. Tabaczynski's connection with Residence Life, as a resident assistant, may also be unappealing to students. Recent speculations accuse Residence Life of being an organization that works against students rather than with them. Students are listening to these speculations, and they might act upon them by voting for McVicker and Cavalier. The student body is lucky to have such professional, qualified students in competition to represent it. While both parties stated their expectations for the office, the McVicker/Cavalier team may carry them out more efficiently.
Next semester students in University Forum will have scheduled plenary sessions. It's an improvement Michael Chiariello, dean of Clare College, needed to make after students demanded more structure in the Clare capstone class. This year, plenary sessions brought everyone enrolled in Forum into one large group to hear a guest speaker, usually during the 12:30-1:30 p.m. time slot where students and professors eat lunch. Sometimes the speaker would come on Wednesday, sometimes he or she would come on Monday. Now it's documented in the Registrar's class schedules. But even though Clare College has scheduled speakers to come from 1:30-3:30 p.m. for two consecutive Wednesdays, with students attending one session, the topics remain dull. This year's theme is energy and the environment. Next year's theme will be food production and the environment. How does either of these relate to the other 11 Clare classes? If the university decided to use current events as the biases for Forum themes, students could learn from speakers with more engaging material and the course articles would be more newsworthy. This would help St. Bonaventure students leave the university as more active members of society and make Clare College more receptive to the students' needs. Imagine a Forum on how our society can react to terrorism and how Franciscans could speak out against war. That relates Forum to the Catholic-Franciscan Heritage, Clare 106. The U.S. government held its first execution in 38 years when Timothy McVeigh died in June. Here's an issue that relates to the Inquiry to the Social World, Clare 105. Someone could speak on the economics of executions and incarceration in the United States. Clare doesn't have to fail. But it needs more value. Better scheduling has improved Forum. Better topics will help, too.
Opinion Page aims to entertain college kids
By Mike Trask Last week, The Bona Venture received a phone call criticizing the Opinion Page's content. The man, who didn't leave his name, said, among other things, "We couldn't look beyond our own pathetic existence." He thought we should have more columns about the war in Afghanistan and the six-month anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center. He's probably right. Many times the Opinion Page turns into a whine-fest and has little to actually say. Often The BV staff doesn't focus on nationally important questions. But, at the same point, we try to focus on topics we feel will interest, inform and entertain our audience, which consists of mainly college students between the ages of 18 and 22. If St. Bonaventure students care to read commentary on the war, the collapse of Enron or other national or international topics, they can easily pick up free issues of The New York Times, The Buffalo News and USA Today throughout campus thanks to the Newspaper Readership Program. It would be foolish for The BV to attempt to compete with these publications. Instead, myself, my assistant, Torre Catalano, and our staff writers try to focus on topics that will interest our audience. We don't always succeed. I'll be the first to admit we don't always make the best decisions regarding content or style. But, I do think we tap into the minds of college kids. No news organization can claim to know its audience better than any college media outlet. Our audience attends class, eats and lives with us. It's both a blessing and a curse. We can be more aware of what they would like to read, but we also know when they don't like it. No one on The BV staff can claim to be an expert on international affairs, economics or congressional politics. We're college kids. We write about what college kids know and care about. When Catalano, a sophomore, writes about residence life, "Saved by the Bell," or his struggles with math class, other students can relate. They can laugh at his story about having a crush on Kelly Kapowski. Many guys our age felt the same way. When freshman Jeremy Noeson, writes about "The Simpsons," his fellow student can say, "I saw that episode," or "This kid doesn't know what he's talking about." Regardless, they know what he's saying. At the same point, I hope my audience can chuckle about my love for the "Rocky" theme song and I know, from the copies of my column taped to residence-hall room doors, they don't agree with my anti-pornography views. The caller was right. We don't always tackle society's pressing topics. But we don't feel the purpose of our opinion section should be to take a stance on topics we have no power over. We can write a million columns on keeping the peace or standing up for our country. We have written a few. But it will have little affect on our readership. No college student, alumni or faculty member will change views or beliefs because some kid wrote a column in The BV. We do think columns about problems on this campus can have an effect on students' lives and others in our community. We try to be their voice and express their concerns about the way this university operates. We also try to make them laugh and think. That's why we write about "The Eye of the Tiger," "The Simpsons" or a battle with university power over a write-up. It's hard to say if we succeed. But we try. And when we try, we do so in front of our peers, professors, administrators and anyone else who picks up our publication. The writer's picture and name sits next to the opinion, no matter how agreeable or disagreeable. We are accountable for what we do. That's more than I can say for an angry caller who doesn't leave his name.
To the editor: It's shocking to me that an American who thinks that U.S. policy has benefited the Middle East can deplore the citizens of other countries for their ignorance of world affairs. While the columnist responsible for "Americans work hard for money," (The Bona Venture, March 8) has access to a wide range of information sources, many people in Middle Eastern countries depend on state-censored and state-sponsored media for information, which is often incorrect, or at least misleading. They have a much better excuse for being misinformed than he does. More importantly, it cannot be denied that U.S. foreign policy has had a negative affect on many Arab nations. In Iraq in particular, thousands of children have died as a direct result of U.S.-imposed sanctions, a fact the writer seems to acknowledge at some point, but which his argument obviously does not take into account. It is also important to note that not all Arab nations are somehow allied against us. Some, such as Egypt, support U.S. foreign policy. And a divide between Sunni and Shiite Muslims (much like the Catholic/Protestant split) makes many of these countries, such as Iran and Iraq enemies, not partners in some anti-American alliance. Most Americans, it's true, work for the things they own. But "working hard" in most third world countries does not mean shelving books in the library for a few hours after class or waiting tables all summer, or even putting in 10 or 12 hour days in an air conditioned office. "Working hard" for them means slaving away over a tiny piece of farmland from dawn to dusk, trying to feed their families. I would love to know how the columnist proposes we "teach" them to grow more food in their arid soil, especially in Middle Eastern countries that are mainly desert. Or how we teach them to build better housing with no materials. A lack of carpentry skills is not exactly the problem here. These people are not children who need their hands held, but adults who are trying to raise families in an economy that offers them no good jobs. Possibly the most upsetting statements in the article had to do with characterizing Americans as a "race" of white people. There is no one race of Americans. People in this country are members of all ethnicities, including Arab ones. Sincerely,
Jessica Keltz
To the students: Today and Monday you are given the opportunity to make a very difficult choice. That choice will determine who represents you as a student body. The election of the student government president will indeed be tough, but I urge you to review both candidates thoroughly before making your decision. So, you may ask, what sets myself and my running partner apart from our opponents? Both Adam and I have dedicated ourselves to making St. Bonaventure University a better place. As Chief of Staff, I have worked closely with this year's executive officers as well as members of the university administration. As a student senator, Adam has been a member of the Alcohol Review Board and was named "Co-Student Senator of the Year." Our past experiences have given us a solid background in student government. However, we look forward to what we can do in the future. Adam and I are fully committed to making St. Bonaventure safer, more convenient, and more fun. We would like to improve some facets of student life as well implement some of our own. This can only be done with help from you, the student body. We feel safety is an important issue on campus. Better campus lighting is one way we want to improve that issue. We also feel a campus transport system designed after the current Bona Bus would greatly improve campus safety. By eliminating the need for security transports, a campus transport system would allow students to travel on campus without burdening other aspects of campus security. We also support a recent proposal sent to the Student Senate outlining the creation of new parking spaces on campus and the redesigning of the lot behind Shay/Loughlen halls. However, we will work to make sure that the increase in parking registration does not continue any further than $15. As much as safety and parking are issues that concern us, we also feel there are other aspects to campus that need help from the student government. With the recent installation of computers in Francis Hall, we would like to continue to make Francis Hall a focal point on the East side of campus. We also support efforts to make wireless computer labs on campus. We hope that use of computers in the library will increase with the possible purchase of more laptop computers. We also feel the need to improve life for the freshmen and sophomores. As sophomores ourselves, Adam and I have noticed a lack in class activities. While the junior class has its prom and the seniors have their senior year activities, there is really no big class activity for the freshmen and sophomores. We hope to work with the class officers on creating activities that will continue on and bring those classes together. We also hope to work with student organizations to bring activities and events to campus from which all students can benefit. As candidates for the presidency and vice presidency of the SGA, Adam and I simply ask that you remember to vote. We hope that you will see our drive and commitment to St. Bonaventure and support our efforts. We are always open to comments and urge you visit our Web site at http://tabs-camp.netfirms.com. We can be contacted via e-mail from that site. We thank you for taking the time to read this letter and look forward to your participation in the election. Sincerely,
Tom Tabaczynski, To my fellow students: Molly and I have been working as class officers since our freshman year and would now like to work for you. Student Government President and Vice President are the positions we wish to fill. We want to improve communication between Student Government officers, senators, students and administrators. It would be beneficial to bring back presidential meetings, where class presidents would discuss and coordinate class activities. As your SGA President and Vice President, we would try to meet with appropriate administrators every other week to discuss issues students tell us they care about. Please participate in the upcoming elections. It's important that you vote. Let your voice be heard on Election Day.
Brittany McVicker,
Molly Cavalier,
Fox knocks itself out with the 'Celebrity Boxing' debacle
By Kyle Renner Whenever I watch the Fox network, I can feel the morals getting sucked out of the room. It seems for every high-quality show Fox premiers, the network puts on hundreds of sleazy specials on in other time slots. I thought I was going to throw a rock at the television when the "Glutton Bowl" rewarded people for eating as much as they could. I thought Fox couldn't sink any lower. It proved me wrong with its latest special, "Celebrity Boxing." When "Celebrity Boxing" aired on March 13, the nation again questioned why Fox still survives in the cable-television age. The show had a simple premise - flash-in-the-pan celebrities duked it out for three rounds lasting two minutes each. It would make sense to see once-bitter rivals fight in a ring to settle old scores, but Fox got together a group of people who have been out of the limelight for years. The show featured three matches that pitted almost two unrelated celebrities against each other. One match pitted Tonya Harding versus Paula Jones. They are both newsmakers who probably have met, let alone have a reason to fight each other. Harding eventually won this bout when Jones gave up. The second match saw Todd Bridges take floor and pummel eighties rap star Vanilla Ice. Lastly, Danny Bonaduce (television's Danny Part-ridge) defeated Barry Williams (Greg Brady). It seemed Fox waved money over several past tabloid stars until six of them jumped. Fox's programming proves people will do anything for money. Traditional television shows gave away money to reward knowledge. Today though, because not everyone can go on "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?," now we have shows like "The Glutton Bowl" that reward people with money for embarrassing themselves. The bigger question is what does this kind of programming say about American society? Fox has been notorious for programs that throw morals out the window, and "Celebrity Boxing" was no different. Fox was the same network that brought us "Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?," "Temptation Island" and what seems to a never-ending number of police-chase shows. People keep watching these types of shows because Fox keeps rolling them out. We as a society are better than these types of shows. It's not about entertainment, but about those who can sink to the lowest common denominator. Does America really want to see these moral-reducing shows? Have we come to the point where the only thing that entertains us are shows with outrageous antics, and no redeeming value? Television is an escape, but don't we want to be entertained by a suspenseful drama or a satire-filled comedy. Some shows are filled with outrageous humor, but these shows do it in such a way where it is funny, not embarrassing and disturbing. Fox has the ability to produce quality and popular shows, like "The Family Guy," "Boston Public" and the long- running "The Simpsons." These shows demonstrate some of the quality I am speaking about, why can't Fox produce more shows like these. As a society, Americans have to send a message to networks about these kinds of programs, and there is only one way: change the channel.
By Jessie Washburn The releases of Eminem's new album, "The Eminem Show," and movie, "8 Mile," have raised questions about the content of some of his songs. Some people feel the material comes across too strong and it offends them. I strongly disagree with these people. This issue leads to the following question: why does the music industry always get blamed by certain groups in society for the irrational acts of obviously disturbed teenagers? Yes, the Columbine shootings happened a long time ago, but kids shooting kids is still an issue. This is an issue, yes, but not the fault of the music industry. Do people honestly believe kids acted perfectly normal until they put an Eminem or Limp Bizkit CD into their stereos? What about the parents who allowed their children to buy and listen to the music? They should be held responsible, not the artists who entertain their children. Musicians entertain. They shouldn't have to teach kids about morals and values or the difference between right and wrong. That should be up to their parents. Has America become so screwed up that children have to look to musicians for role models? Granted, musicians, as well as professional athletes, actors and others in the public eye, have always been, and will always be role models to kids. But, parents need to say, "Hey, Johnny, remember when (insert pro athlete) beat up that referee when he didn't agree with the call? That was very wrong," and then set a good example for Johnny to follow. Or maybe the parents should tell their children that while they can enjoy Eminem's music, they shouldn't emulate his acts. There's nothing wrong with artists being role models. A lot of them set very fine examples for their loyal, young followers. Take, for example members from U2, who openly fight for several political and social causes. However, something's wrong with a society that provides nothing but famous people for kids to look up to. Enter the parents. If parents would spend time with their children and tell them they don't approve of the behavior mentioned in certain songs, for example, "Kim," in which Eminem kills his wife, then maybe society wouldn't have the problems it has. Would it be the end of the troubles? No, but it would be a start. Did Eminem really kill his wife? No. Did he really want to do it? He says he didn't. Eminem made a good point recently, saying that just because he raps about something, doesn't mean he believes in it or encourages it. How many times have you said, "Man, I just want to kill that guy?" The difference between you and Eminem is that millions of people don't hear you say it. Don't want your kids listening to music containing explicit lyrics? Don't buy it for them. Has Eminem committed any of the various acts of violence seen in today's schools? No, so don't blame him for it.
Send questions and comments to The Bona Venture. |