Category: Opinion

Whether I’m casually clicking my way through a Facebook profile of someone who, let’s be honest, I’ve never met before, or trying to figure out what the correct reagent is for my organic chemistry homework, you can bet that I’ll have to refresh the internet at least five times in the hour.

This is a serious BishopNet problem. Some people may still consider the internet to be a luxury we all need to stop obsessing over, but to us college students, the internet is a necessity. Half of my homework has to be completed online or I have to get assignments off of Blackboard.

Not to mention the fact that my world will literally shut down if I can’t read or send emails successfully at any given moment of the day. The internet at Ohio Wesleyan has never been perfect, and I don’t expect it to be. But we aren’t a very big school, and I would hope that we could manage to have a network that can process 2,000 internet connections if OSU up the road has a million connections.

That may have been an exaggeration, but it’s still a problem. Having the internet crash on you while watching the newest “Grey’s Anatomy” sucks, but having it crash as you’re filling out a grad school application – debilitating.
The last two and a half years I’ve been on campus, BishopNet has gone from a slight annoyance to a connection that barely exists.

My knowledge of servers and networks is slim to none, but I can’t bear to think of another semester living in fear of the unpredictable connection.

A student working in the OWU network control center explained to me that the problem has been ongoing and things have been worked on, but the efforts to fix the slow connections and trips have apparently not helped the situation.

Perhaps we need to invest in more servers, or devote more time to the situation, because whatever work is being done, clearly is to no avail. Not only do students rely on the internet, but most of the professors, faculty and staff have to use BishopNet to accomplish normal, daily tasks. With a dysfunctional internet, the time it takes to do these tasks increases, and then nothing gets done on time or at least not without frustration. The only time BishopNet problems are o.k., is when they are describing OWU students’ mutual understanding of Thursday morning struggles.

Otherwise, we need some serious internet connection help.

Emily Hostetler
Transcript Reporter

By Breanne Reilly
Transcript Reporter

When OWU Compliments popped up in my news feed in December 2012, I liked it immediately. The Facebook forum was created last semester so Bishops could show anonymous appreciation toward OWU students, organizations and staff.
According to the creators, who are all students, the forum was inspired by a suggestion from OWU memes and the Queens University Compliments page. It is all about giving Bishops the “warm-and-fuzzies” through positive posts that thank, compliment or encourage.

The page is set up so participants can simply send the administrators a private message. The creators repost the message without revealing the poster’s name. For extra anonymity, the page offers a Google form users can fill out so that even the creators do not know the source of the message.

Many of the posts refer to specific students or groups. Students who follow the page have a habit of tagging the people the post is addressed to so that they can receive his or her compliment on their news feed. These followers have taken on a shared responsibility to make sure the warm message gets back to the addressee. This is great example of how our community operates.

The creators encourage those who are mentioned in posts to compliment students who have not been mentioned on the page. The students can then pay it forward and keep a stream of positive posts up.

Although posts that mention specific students allow Compliments users to “share the love,” I prefer the comments that are left open to interpretation. A couple of weeks ago, somebody posted, “To the brunette I shared a laugh with in Corns today, you are a fox and I like your shoes.”

My initial reaction to this comment: Moi? Somebody thinks I’m funny! Somebody thinks I’m fashionable! I was elated.
My second reaction to this comment: Wait. This post could refer to any person with brown hair who has a class in Corns.

This is what I like about the anonymity the site offers. Some of the posts that Bishops leave are not specific so they can be taken as a compliment by several students. Imagine what 500 brunettes could accomplish with amped up confidence.

I also like the anonymity because it makes the compliment more believable. When we are complimented by our friends, we don’t always believe them. They tell us how great we are all the time. A stranger can be a more reliable source for a genuine compliment.

The anonymity of the forum also makes users feel free to share their thoughts. It’s easier to talk to someone when we’re not in front of them. Face-to-face communication makes us susceptible to others’ reactions. Behind our computer screens and anonymous identities we do not as vulnerable. We can thank our helpers without risking the Hallmark moment or admit a crush without getting all red in the face.

This tendency to open up online is called the online disinhibition effect. Harmless symptoms of this effect include a less guarded, more affectionate attitude while logged on. We are less anxious about the consequences of cyberspace actions because they cannot be directly linked to us.

The positive statements on OWU Compliments prove that this effect is not a bad thing. But communicating through social media behind a shield of anonymity can have negative consequences. Little of our communication takes place through written or spoken words. Approximately 93 percent of our communication is based on what we perceive through body language. Humans need interactive, authentic communication to properly connect.

And this is the only problem I have with an anonymous online forum.

The point of OWU Compliments is just that–to compliment—and not necessarily to connect. Arguably, the page has brought the community closer together as a whole. But since its creation, there have been hundreds of positive posts from Bishops. I could be making an assumption, but that’s hundreds of compliments and thank you’s that were not delivered through a personal means of communication.

Although we do positive deeds through posting on the page, we don’t help ourselves through faceless appreciation. We are avoiding face-to-face communication and allowing anonymous posters on an online forum to communicate for us.
My recommendation is this: if you want to compliment or thank someone, say it to them in person. Then go and post it on the OWU Compliments page so you can share your appreciation with the entire community.

By Thomas Wolber
Associate Professor of MFL

For some 170 years, Ohio Wesleyan University has been in the business of educating students. On the one hand, it attempts to develop a young person’s knowledge, skills, critical thinking and intellect. On the other hand, according to its “Statement of Aims,” it places education in the context of values.

Among the quoted goals are intellectual honesty, the concern for ethical issues (such as justice), the appreciation of cultural heritages and the willingness to meet the responsibilities of citizenship.

Thus, OWU strives to equip students not only with knowledge but also with “character.” We are a community of students and teachers united in the free pursuit of truth in the never-ending quest to examine the world around and within ourselves.

Ohio Wesleyan, founded by Methodists, is not unique in that respect. Many colleges and universities have goals that are based in Greco-Roman philosophy and/or the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Within that frame of reference, let us examine now the issue of socially responsible investing (SRI). It becomes clear very quickly that there is a deep gap between theory and practice. It is often the case that institutions of higher learning invest their endowment funds in whatever yields the highest returns. The maximization of profit is often the primary goal and the highest priority. In the short-term pursuit of revenues, the consideration of the long-term social and political impact is often ignored. Many schools claim to have strong ethical values, but when it comes to business decisions, they are unscrupulous. They teach good citizenship but don’t practice it themselves. They don’t put their money where their mouth is, forgetting that reputations and legacy are enhanced or diminished by the choices we make.

The question is, should a university (or a pension fund) invest in “sin stocks” involving alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pesticides, guns and ammunition, prostitution or pornography? Should they invest in coal mines, hydraulic fracturing, nuclear power plants and other industries that are harmful to humankind and to the environment?

Should they invest in countries where a tiny elite reaps all the income and squirrels it away in Swiss bank accounts while the vast majority of the population is oppressed and starving? Should they invest in far-flung countries on the other side of the globe when their own local communities are not thriving because of a lack of jobs? Wouldn’t such investments be socially irresponsible and in violation of the stated missions of most colleges even if the income is intended to serve educational purposes? How does this create a better world?

If you take the notion of “intellectual honesty” seriously, the answer must be unequivocally no. Institutions must consider the social, political, and environmental impact of their investment strategy. In the opinion of this writer, the endowment portfolio of a university should match their mission. The good news is that green investing is growing rapidly. Plenty of viable alternatives exist if business-affairs people and trustees only cared to look.

Locally, Huntington Bancshares recently rolled out a new investment option called EcoLogical Strategy ETF that emphasizes renewable energies, energy conservation, ecofarming, natural and organic foods and recycling. Nationally, in 2005 there were 55 funds with a total of $12 billion in assets. Five years later, in 2010, there were 250 mutual funds with $316 billion in assets. In 2012, the numbers was 333 funds with $640.5 billions.

The field is exploding. Dozens of publications offer information about environmentally friendly stocks and bonds and other green-investing strategies. The non-profit US-SIF (Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment) has a great website that explores ethical investment options. The U.N.-based “Principles for Responsible Investment” is another webpage devoted to SRIs globally.

In the corporate world, more and more responsible shareholders are demanding change and are exerting pressure. At a growing number of colleges and universities, too, students and teachers concerned about climate change are demanding that their institutions sell off their holdings in fossil-fuel companies, which represent a significant portion of the stock market.

Colleges and universities can and must do more to practice good corporate citizenship. Socially Responsible Investment would be an excellent starting point.

By Thomas Wolber
Associate Professor of MFL

This is the time of year when student papers are due. So, let’s have a closer look at what constitutes proper, original research as opposed to dubious, unreliable second-hand information based on misconceptions.

Wikipedia, widely used by students, is a good case study to investigate the question.

Students are sure to have been told that “Wikipedia is not an authoritative source of information and should not be used as evidence when writing a paper,” to quote an OSU history professor.

Why is that?

Isn’t Wikipedia a great source of valuable factual and verifiable information for all kinds of things?

It is, and I myself use it frequently when I am in a hurry and need to have a quick look at an unfamiliar topic.

But just because a source of information appears in print or on the Internet does not make it trustworthy and truthful.

Before adopting something as a fact, you should always scrupulously investigate its authority, accuracy and currency.

The main problem with Wikipedia and similar data-delivery systems, as I see it, is that they rely heavily on conventional wisdom and established viewpoints.

Opposing and unpopular viewpoints get marginalized or even rejected. The majority view trumps the minority view, regardless whether it is right or wrong.

Therefore, it must be understood that Wikipedia is not in the business of weighing claims and ascertaining the truth.

As a result, untrue myths get perpetuated whereas new knowledge on the forefront of scholarship and science gets short shifted.

Wikipedia, built on mass consensus, is open and democratic. But factual, empirical knowledge is not a matter to be voted on.

A million people may indeed believe that the earth is coming to an end soon, but that does not necessarily make it true.

The use of Wikipedia is especially problematical when it comes to the discovery and creation of new, cutting-edge knowledge on the frontiers of contemporary inquiry. As any avant-gardist artist or researcher knows, sometimes it is necessary to go against the prevailing wisdom.

Whenever there is such a paradigm shift – for example the paradigm shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric world view – the old and the new philosophy are in direct competition with each other.

Initially, the new viewpoint has a hard time asserting itself.

It will be ignored, ridiculed, censored, suppressed, attacked, etc., before it is finally accepted and becomes the prevailing view.

Today’s paradigm shift is sustainability, climate change and the world moving toward a post-industrial and post-consumer world.

In the U.S., the green movement is still widely ignored and attacked, although that is slowly beginning to change. Adherents are marginalized and – unlike in other countries – not yet in leadership positions.

It will take decades and generations for this paradigm shift to reach full attainment.

Eventually, however, yesterday’s heretics and dissidents will become tomorrow’s movers and shakers, and their view will become the prevailing one while it will be proponents of the “ancien régime” who will be on the defensive.

In these epic battles of minds and ideas Wikipedia is of little help.

Original,out-of-the-box research, thinking and perceptive knowledge is needed, not the mindless repetition of old bromides.

Colleges and universities such as Ohio Wesleyan are the places where true knowledge is discovered, described, and imparted to new generations of students and scholars.

Wikipedia provides you with factoids and is a good starting point.

However, it does not give you the deeper insights and wisdom needed to understand and navigate the many intricacies and mysteries of both the physical and the metaphysical world.

By Spenser Hickey
Transcript Correspondent

As a proud liberal, a member of OWU’s College Democrats, and a former volunteer with President Obama’s re-election campaign, I am ashamed of the judgemental behavior referenced in last week’s editorial “I’m not stupid. I’m a Republican.”

I am writing to express my sympathies for the closeted Republican who wrote it – and anyone else here on campus in a similar situation – and to make it clear that such negative attitudes are not the position of all College Democrats or, I hope, those of the majority of Democrats on OWU’s campus.

No one should be dismissed as unintelligent or idiotic simply because of party affiliation, and I am discouraged to hear that some of my liberal peers on campus have acted so inappropriately.

I would argue that those, like the anonymous writer, who identify with a party – either one – but take the time to look at each issue and determine their own position, even if it’s against the party line, are the smartest and best of us all.

I admit I am not entirely blameless in this; I have dismissed those in the ‘Obama is a Kenyan/Muslim/communist’ camp as deluded and candidates such as Todd Akin as ignorant on basic science.

Perhaps I should not have done so.

Regardless of this, these groups are but a fringe of the GOP – though a frighteningly vocal one – and their views should not be applied to all Republicans.
Throughout the campaigning season, I saw Republican candidates pushing each other to go farther and farther into ultra conservative territory in order to appeal to the more fanatical members of their party.

As a Democrat, I watched this with some trepidation, fearing what would happen if they were elected and retained their views in office, but mostly I was pleased to know that their far right stances were handing us moderate votes on a platter.

As an American, though, it made me sad.

If the Republican Party continues to put more emphasis on appealing to the uber conservative, rather than the moderate American, they may jeopardize their position as an equal opponent to the Democratic Party.

The need to maintain that balance is far more important to me than the benefit an overwhelming majority it would give my party.

So bravo to you, sir or miss, for having the courage to retain your political affiliation while also having the integrity to determine your own view on issues today.

I am sorry you have been victimized for being a Republican.

I hope that those around you will recognize your views and the thought you have put into developing them, rather than disparaging you on account of your informed party allegiance.

I would be honored to hear from you and to discuss the issues as Americans, rather than opponents.

You are, in this humble Democrat’s opinion, an exemplary Republican and citizen.

You are not stupid.

By Elizabeth Childers
Online Editor

This weekend, an alumnus and I were walking around Stuyvescent Hall. He had not seen the new building since its renovations occurred after his graduation and wanted to see the changes made.

He was pleasantly surprised by the new flooring, fireplaces and lobby settings. And as we entered the courtyard, he happily pointed out how beautiful it was with its new staircase and sitting area. He was also happy to see the new fountain running.

“It was just a big hole in the ground when I was here,” he explained to me and another student.

However, as we got closer, we noticed that one of the three frogs of the fountain was not on the perimeter with its brethren, but instead had decided to take a dip in the water. Or rather, it was involuntarily thrown in.

This is not the only report on vandalism we’ve had on campus, though it is arguably the saddest. This is, for all intents and purposes, a new building. The university spent a lot of money and a lot of man-hours in creating a nicer place to live for the students. This year’s freshmen don’t know the world of exploding heaters, lack of air conditioning and subpar appliances. It is reasonable to say OWU has given the building a new facelift. So isn’t it a blatant insult to the university that students have the audacity to ruin the work that has been done, for no real reason?

Stuy isn’t the only building that’s been victimized. Smith’s residents have wracked up quite a debt, between $35-40, because of bulletin boards being ripped off the walls and other such shows of immature idiocy. And, I don’t know the whole story about this, but Sunday morning I noticed a shutter on one of the fraternity houses hanging haphazardly as it had been ripped from the building’s façade. Even the Delt house is looking more abandoned than ever, since someone broke a window on the basement floor and a plywood board has covered it.

Even personal property is not protected on the streets of OWU. Stories of students having their side-view mirrors damaged and bikes being stolen or molested have been heard through the student grapevine.
Students don’t seem to have much respect for anyone or anything on campus, save their own things. I’m not sure what you’ve been taught, but how much destruction done does not give you a measurement how great the night before was.

I know most of you who are committing these acts of violence won’t be reading this, so I can’t say, “shame on you!” and expect you to hear it. Perhaps some of you don’t even remember doing the things I’ve listed.

So let me just say the amount of vandalism, and with it the astounding lack of respect we see on this university, is unacceptable for “young adults.”

By Rachel Vinciguera
Transcript Correspondent

We’ve all seen the silo in the middle of HamWill.

It seems like everyone’s got an opinion about it.

“It’s in the way.”

“That thing gave me splinters!”

“Did you know you can climb inside…?”

Like anyone else, I’ve got my opinions too.

The Silo as Art.

First and foremost, the silo is meant to be a part of a larger art project that you may have noticed pieces of around campus.

We all seem to complain about the silo, but how many of us have taken a chance to read the sign that hangs only a few feet away?

I’ll fill you in.

Abram W. Kaplan, an environmental studies professor from Denison, created this art piece as a reaction to the American food system and how he has come to understand it.

Kaplan was partially inspired by a field trip during which he took his students to a farm and spoke with the farmer about where our food comes from. He came to see food in a different way, and the silo seeks to help us see our food differently, too.

The sign reads, “through art, through communication with one another, through experiential activities, we may arrive at new ways of knowing.”

And that, right there, is the beauty of the silo.

You can say it is in the way.

You can say it has caused some injuries.

And, yes, you can ignore the fact that it is a piece of art by climbing inside.

But you can’t say it hasn’t caused discussion; that it hasn’t created experiences.

The Silo as an Annoyance

The placement of the silo in, debatably, the busiest spot on campus has caused a great deal of discussion among students.

It sits in the center of the atrium, smack dab in the middle of our central gathering spot.

And let me tell you a little secret: I love that it interrupts our daily routine.

I love that people are bothered by it.

That’s my favorite kind of art.

The kind that stops you in your tracks.

The kind that makes you wrinkle your nose and furl your brow like you just got a whiff of skunk.

The kind that pisses you off.

That means it’s doing something! That means you’re thinking!

And doesn’t it also serve Kaplan’s purpose? We eat food every day, it may not be good, it may be Chartwells, but we all eat every single day.

Food itself is a pretty constant and permanent presence in our lives, isn’t it?

Just like the silo.

And I think the placement is perfect.

The Silo as a Relevant Issue

For all of you New York Times readers out there, you will probably remember that a couple of weeks ago an article was published: “Silos Loom as Death Traps on American Farms” by John Broeder.

Broeder wrote about the more than 80 silo-related deaths that have occurred over the past five years: almost entirely young men.

And almost entirely preventable.

He discussed the process of sending boys (as young as 14) to loosen the grain from the inside walls of the silo with a steel rod, and how very often that grain would fall from the sides suddenly and suffocate them underneath.

The safety codes in place for many farms, because they tend to be small family-owned organizations, are not the same as in other workplaces.

Under the assumption that parents will treat their own children better than random employees, many farms are not required by the government to undergo the same safety inspections as other organizations, and this leads to the injury and very often death of these young male employees.

Tommy Osier was 18, when, as he was loosening the grain, it piled down on top of him and suffocated him to death.

Wyatt Whitebread, only 14, was sent into a silo to do the same–not aware that he would suffer the same fate.

And these are just a couple of the many boys who have been killed the same way.

This is something that happens every single year to young boys working on farms around our country, and we never hear about it.

No, the silo is not meant to be a looming symbol of these devastating accidents, but that is what it has become in my mind.

To me, that is the silo’s most significant purpose.

For me, it serves as a reminder of these young lives lost.

And, more than that, it reminds me that there are things happening every day, all over the world, and right in front of me, that I don’t take the time to understand or even be informed about.

Every time I see the silo I am reminded of Tommy and Wyatt. And I am reminded of a problem that has yet to be fixed.

It may not have been Kaplan’s goal when he created the work and honestly, I don’t know how he would feel about my reaction.

But that’s the other great thing about art: everyone sees it differently, and its meaning can change over time as the world around us always changes, too.

It really is all about perception. And I think art is especially exciting when our perceptions can be changed by events going on around us.