Addressing comments

Editorial: Compass Rose

On Monday, Bowdoin announced that Clayton S. Rose, a professor at the Harvard Business School, will be the College’s 15th President. Admittedly, Rose is not the most exciting or novel candidate, but that in no way means that he is not the best fit to lead the College. The dedicated members of the search committee spent countless hours evaluating candidates and we are confident that he is exceptionally qualified for the position. There is no sense in passing judgment on President-elect Rose’s ability to lead the College before his work has begun. While some may have initial reservations about Rose, we have every reason to be optimistic.
While it is fruitless to scrutinize Rose before he takes office, it can be valuable to ask how his unique characteristics can help the College at this moment in its history. His tenure as chief operating officer of J.P. Morgan and his management expertise indicate he has the leadership skills the College will need. That he did research on race in corporate settings after transitioning to academia shows a commitment to addressing issues of diversity not unlike those that affect Bowdoin on a daily basis. Too often, the values of corporate America and the liberal arts seem in conflict with one another, but Rose’s résumé proves he can reconcile the two. His contributions to both areas can serve as a model for students looking to achieve business success without sacrificing a committment to the common good.
When President Barry Mills announced his plan to retire, the Orient’s editorial board wrote, “An outsider will be able to evaluate campus culture without the bias toward the status quo that comes with having been a part of it; he or she will also have a fresh start with Bowdoin’s various interest groups—the students, the faculty, the staff, and the Brunswick community.” President-elect Rose’s position as an outsider will allow him to recognize the College’s strengths and also identify where it has room to improve. Rose has a clean slate with Bowdoin’s interest groups, which gives him an opportunity to forge new relationships between the administration and the student community.
His experience makes him particularly well-suited to address several important areas of concern for the College. Increasing Bowdoin’s accessibility and diversity by growing the endowment and prioritizing financial aid was one of Mills’ strengths and should be a top priority for the president-elect. Rose must also continue to modernize the College’s curriculum while still maintaining its liberal arts identity. While addressing these issues and the others that will arise, we hope that Rose will be willing and eager to engage with students, faculty and alumni. Collaboration will be key to making Rose—a newcomer to the environment of a small liberal arts college—successful in his new role.
Leadership changes in an institution like Bowdoin are an important time for reflection, not a time for quick criticisms. As our seventh president, William DeWitt Hyde, wrote in the Offer of the College, part of Bowdoin’s mission is, “To gain a standard for the appreciation of others’ work and the criticism of your own.” The Bowdoin community should receive Rose’s unique knowledge base with optimism and be ready to work toward preserving what we love about Bowdoin and changing what we do not.
This editorial represents the majority view of the Bowdoin Orient’s editorial board, which is comprised of Garrett Casey, Ron Cervantes, Sam Chase, Matthew Gutschenritter, Nicole Wetsman and Kate Witteman.

Editorial: The hard sell

Dartmouth College President Phil Hanlon announced on January 29 that alcoholic beverages that are more than 15 percent alcohol by volume (ABV) would be prohibited from Dartmouth’s campus beginning this spring. The announcement has sparked discussion about the role of hard alcohol on college campuses around the country, with the debate proceeding along these lines: Administrators and health experts argue that limiting hard alcohol consumption reduces binge drinking and makes campuses safer. Detractors claim that hard alcohol bans are evidence of college administrators becoming increasingly paternalistic. After a similar policy went into effect at Bowdoin in the late 1990s, the College became a safer place to drink.
Much of the coverage of Dartmouth’s new ban makes reference to Bowdoin, which was one of the first schools to enact such a policy. Bowdoin prohibits the possession of hard liquor with an alcohol content of more than 10 percent ABV, while permitting beer, wine, malt beverages and hard cider. Both Amherst and Williams prohibit hard alcohol at registered events, with a few exceptions. Hamilton banned it briefly, but lifted the ban in 2012. Of the 11 NESCAC schools, only Bates, Colby and Bowdoin have banned hard alcohol entirely.
Bowdoin’s policy provides a strong deterrent to having hard alcohol at campus-wide parties that we believe protects students from overconsumption. Whereas a typical mixed drink like jungle juice—which contains an unknown amount of alcohol—might be served at parties at other schools, it is relatively uncommon at Bowdoin. That is not to say that one cannot find hard alcohol on campus. Students often binge drink in their rooms before attending larger parties, and opponents of prohibiting hard alcohol argue that bans encourage rather than deter such dangerous behavior. However, if students do choose to pre-game with hard alcohol, at least they are making their own drinks in a controlled environment, rather than consuming mystery drinks in the midst of a chaotic party.
In recent years, Bowdoin has had a low number of student transports and last year had the lowest in the NESCAC. Although this statistic is also attributable to other factors, the College’s policy certainly helps foster a healthier drinking culture. A ban on hard alcohol alone cannot create a safe campus party environment, but it is an important step in the right direction.
Enacting a policy that moderates the behavior of college students is not an easy task, and even Bowdoin’s time-tested ban is not without its downsides. But by and large, our experiences at the College have confirmed that banning hard alcohol is more responsible than it is paternalistic. Each year roughly the same number of U.S. college students die from alcohol-related causes as are enrolled at Bowdoin, and although there may be other ways to prevent these deaths, banning hard alcohol should not be overlooked as a potential solution. It took a tragic death in the late 1990s for Bowdoin to reassess its drinking culture, and today’s students are better off as a result. We hope that the recent national attention given to Dartmouth’s actions will encourage other schools to consider similar policies.
This editorial represents the majority view of the Bowdoin Orient’s editorial board, which is comprised of Garrett Casey, Ron Cervantes, Sam Chase, Matthew Gutschenritter, Nicole Wetsman and Kate Witteman.

Editorial

This piece represents the opinion of The Bowdoin Orient editorial board.

February 6, 2015

After the redesign of its website several years ago, the Orient began using the commenting platform Disqus to provide an easy way for readers to respond to articles. Recently, many large publications have eliminated their comment sections entirely, while many others are re-evaluating their comment policies and engaging in more active moderation. Too often the Orient’s comment threads devolve into off-topic arguments or personal attacks on writers, rather than thoughtful discussions of issues. The editorial board believes in the value of open discourse and hopes that our articles spark thoughtful and respectful conversations. Readers deserve to be heard and our comment section is an important medium for people to voice their opinions. We are therefore implementing a set of guidelines that we believe will elevate the quality of the discourse in our comment sections.

Please read our new Comment Policy below:

The Bowdoin Orient encourages its readers to submit thoughtful and relevant comments on its stories. Our goal is to provide a space for considerate discussion, civil debate and informed commentary.

The Orient strongly encourages commenters to use their real names, or at the very least, a relevant descriptor (i.e. class of '92, parent, sophomore, etc.). Commenters should not misrepresent themselves by using someone else's name; if this is discovered, the comment will be removed.

When a comment is submitted, the name and email address provided are made available to the Orient. This information is never shared nor made public.

Comments are moderated by a small team of Orient editors and they will not appear on the site immediately. Comments will be approved if they are relevant and contribute to a thoughtful discussion of the article.

Comments will not be approved if:

They contain hate speech (including speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation).

They contain obscene, suggestive, vulgar, profane (including insinuated profanity using dashes or asterisks), threatening, disrespectful, defamatory or libelous language.

They do not relate to the article (including spam, commercial promotion and incoherence).

They are written by a commenter who continually comments on the same story without adding anything new to the discussion.

They include personal attacks on reporters

They are longer than 200 words. If you feel strongly about an issue, we recommend submitting a full Op-Ed or a Letter to the Editor.

They only point out factual or spelling errors. Comments pointing out errors are appreciated but will not be posted online. Instead, please send corrections to orient@bowdoin.edu.

The Orient strives to be as consistent as possible in moderation, but final judgements are the subjective decision of the moderators. The Orient reserves the right to reject or delete any comment, or disable commenting, for any reason. Due to the high volume of comments, the Orient may not be able to respond to inquiries related to specific moderation decisions.

Commenting may be disabled on high-profile stories that attract spam comments. Additionally, the Orient reserves the right to disable commenting on an article that is no longer topical or that was published more than four years ago.

Once submitted, comments become the property of the Bowdoin Orient. They may be published in print using the name attached to the comment. If a real name is used, the commenter will be contacted to confirm his or her identity before the comment is published in print.

The views expressed in comments are solely those of the commenter. They are not endorsed or promoted by the Bowdoin Orient or Bowdoin College.

The Bowdoin Orient encourages its readers to submit thoughtful and relevant comments on its stories. Our goal is to provide a space for considerate discussion, civil debate and informed commentary.

When a comment is submitted, the name and email address provided are made available to the Orient. This information is never shared nor made public.

Comments will not be approved if:

They contain hate speech (including speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation).
They contain obscene, suggestive, vulgar, profane (including insinuated profanity using dashes or asterisks), threatening, disrespectful, defamatory or libelous language.
They do not relate to the article (including spam, commercial promotion and incoherence).
They are written by a commenter who continually comments on the same story without adding anything new to the discussion.
They include personal attacks on reporters
They are longer than 200 words. If you feel strongly about an issue, we recommend submitting a full Op-Ed or a Letter to the Editor.
They only point out factual or spelling errors. Comments pointing out errors are appreciated but will not be posted online. Instead, please send corrections to orient@bowdoin.edu.

The views expressed in comments are solely those of the commenter. They are not endorsed or promoted by the Bowdoin Orient or Bowdoin College.

Comments are permanently closed.