In a rather sardonic response to Wesleyan’s gun violence forum and similar gun control demands on college campuses, The Onion completely shat on every college’s contribution to the gun discussion in a video clip titled “College Activists Excited to Add Powerless Voices to the Gun Debate.” At about 0:34 seconds in, a screenshot of an Argus editorial on the subject is
hilariously incorrectly dubbed a “fruitless campus newspaper editorial.”
Curiously, the Argus shot is immediately followed by a phone interview with “Michael Feiring, Vassar Student,” whom upperclassmen will immediately recognize as Micah Feiring ’11, former WSA President (and not quite a Vassar student). Wesleying reached out to Feiring for comment last Friday, and he replied yesterday.
“I was actually unaware of this video at the time I received your message,” wrote Feiring. “Needless to say, I did not speak with The Onion about the role college activists play in the gun control debate. I do support stricter regulations and I think that all voices are significant in the gun control dialogue—even poorly run newspapers like the Wesleyan Argus.
Last week, members of Wesleying and The Argus’s editorial staffs collaborated on a joint editorial regarding the whole need-blind thing. The piece appeared in Friday’s Argus, and while it’s not quite as poetic as Martin Benjamin ’57’s latest (which uses the phrase “fat-fannied corps of social engineers” and refers to President Roth as “Mike the Ripper”), it nonetheless appears below. If you don’t think opinion pieces belong on Wesleying, go ahead and skip this one.
Next week, Wesleying will host a live forum with President Roth regarding the need-blind issue and general concerns. Check back for details later in the week.
As the editors of the two most prominent news publications on campus, The Wesleyan Argus and Wesleying, we’d like to make public our support for the movement to preserve need-blind admissions at Wesleyan University. Though we have never written a joint editorial before, we think it is now imperative that we use our platforms on campus to show solidarity with this cause. We’ve been concerned with how few details we have been provided regarding financial considerations and administrative decisions. We’ve been more concerned by the alarming shortsightedness of this decision—one that severely compromises the value Wesleyan places on socioeconomic diversity.