OPINION: The Daily Trojan Editorial Board is terribly one-sided
We deserve a prominent forum for open dialogue
It is no secret that the University of Southern California has taken grand strides in enhancing public perception, propagating influence and improving academic performance.
Thus, with expanding connections in the greater Pacific Rim paired with academic success and strong postgraduate opportunities, USC is exclusively for prepared "spoiled children" and is "second choice" only to Stanford (I kid). Nonetheless, while the university is progressing as a successful institution for higher learning, one prominent fixture of campus life and to the greater community – the Daily Trojan Editorial Board – continues to falter.
The greatest of academic institutions never succeeded alone on unbridled enthusiasm. In academic traditions, there is need for questioning, challenges of perception, and alternatives to one’s own world view. The college experience at best is a forum for opinions and a stage for the market of ideas. At worst, it is stringently aligned with synonymous thinking.
While it is still early in the semester to fully comprehend the editorial stance of the DT’s newest editorial board, from the secured history of past board stances we can securely place the editorial board’s views in the arena of a progressive echo chamber. No independent thinking to be had and certainty no challenges to perceptions need be explored. Their past positions have been at large dully expected, falling into regressive unchallenged academic rhetoric.
Such “hard hitting” pieces as “USC must engage in dialogue with students” and “USC Village must widen economic access” graced the pages of the Daily Trojan this past semester providing vague premises and largely idealistic musings, with the realist views of alumni setting comment sections ablaze. The progressives on staff seem to have forgotten a core tenant of progress aligns with dialogue, even dialogue conjured in the opposition.
A personal favorite DT article of mine was entitled, “USC must offer a 24 hour dining hall.” In this grand spectacle, the the editorial board was able to show great gravitas in making a mountain out of a mole hill for a prime non-issue. At times, it reads like a social justice tabloid, expanding on issues more appropriate for a Labor Union newsletter than editorial section.
Politically aligned group thinking is toxic not only for college campuses at large, but for important forums of campus duologue. While I certainly don’t expect the Daily Trojan to align with “National Review,” I equally don’t expect it go the way of “The Nation” either.
There is nothing wrong with wanting to propagate progressive views. With prior experience on staff, it is safe to say the DT editorial board puts forward plenty of due-diligence in terms of factual legitimacy. In terms of editorial prowess, however, the DT could start to align not with comforting assumptions, but serve as a diversified forum.
As university students, we deserve a prominent forum for open dialogue. It is imperative that all opinions be expressed and all sides represented.