Why Canceling Classes Tomorrow Matters

Interim President Carol Folt decided hours ago to cancel classes for tomorrow: Wednesday, April 24, 2013. According to a campus-wide blitz sent at 6:38 PM, the decision was “prompted by a series of threatening and abusive online posts used to target particular students in the wake of the protest that disrupted the Dimensions Welcome Show on Friday evening.”

In lieu of classes, there will be a series of events held throughout the day tomorrow. A “social justice and diversity” consultant will speak in Dartmouth Hall. There will be a “community gathering” outside the same building. The blitz indicates that the centerpieces of tomorrow’s schedule will be “small discussions facilitated by faculty and staff in rooms across campus,” from 1:30 to 3:00 PM.

It is not yet known how this will affect the academic schedules of classes on campus. The blitz makes vague reference to the issue, stating that “the faculty will decide how best to make up tomorrow's class time.” All that is certain is that there will be no classes tomorrow in order to make room for these alternative programs.

This announcement comes on the heels of an April 20 blitz from Dean of the College Charlotte Johnson. In it, she stated that “on Friday evening a small group of students chose a Dimensions event to protest and express their views regarding some aspects of campus life. While the choice of venue may be debated, we are concerned because students who participated in the protest - as well as many students not involved in any way - are reporting that they are being harassed by other members of our community.”

Note that neither Dean Johnson nor Interim President Folt condemns the Dimensions protesters or the protest itself. Although Dean Johnson references the protest, she only writes that “the choice of venue may be debated.”

As articles in The Review and The Daily Dartmouth alike have already stated, these protests were not entirely non-violent. To give a short recapitulation: under false pretenses and explicit instruction not to come in, a group of students assaulted some upperclassmen trying to stop them from entering the main hall at the Class of 1953 Commons. The group then interrupted the middle of a skit in front of stunned prospies and students alike. Until they were inspiringly shouted down by a prospy-led chant of “We Love Dartmouth,” the protesters screamed a variety of slogans decrying the perceived level of sexual assault, racism, and homophobia on campus.

From almost every segment except the administration itself, there has been widespread condemnation of the protest. Students had worked tirelessly for weeks on end to prepare for the show: some of the participants visibly cried as the protesters took stage. Many prospies, especially the very students the demonstrators may have hoped to attract, will doubtlessly choose another school. What the protesters did was wrong.

Not only was it wrong – it was illegal. As pointed out by multiple commentators, the protesters broke more than one clause under Section VIII of the “Dartmouth Community Standards of Conduct,” which states that “students and student organizations must not intentionally disrupt, interfere with, or obstruct teaching, research, or College administration.” Punishable instances include “the unauthorized entry into, or occupation of a private office, work area, or a closed and/or posted College building” and “conduct (including by way of example, obstruction, noise, or the display of banners or objects) that prevents or disrupts the effective carrying out of a College function or approved activity, such as classes, lectures, meetings, interviews, ceremonies, and public events.” The demonstrators violated all of the clauses above.

The protesters also can be punished under New Hampshire law. Chapter 644 of the Criminal Code notes that “a person is guilty of disorderly conduct if he or she disrupt[s] any lawful assembly or meeting of persons without lawful authority.” Section VI states that “disorderly conduct is a misdemeanor if the offense continues after a request by any person to desist; otherwise, it is a violation.” As a video posted on YouTube shows, more than one person attempted to persuade the group to stop, and has been noted, the protesters actually assaulted someone trying to halt them from entering the main hall.

In essence, what the protesters did was legally wrong and morally suspect. And most everyone except the protesters and the administration themselves have said as such. But as the events of the last few hours have shown, the administration has cancelled classes tomorrow without any statement as to whether the protesters will be held accountable for their actions.

The protesters sent a letter sent to the administration on Monday, April 22. Without admitting any guilt or apologizing in any way, the group states that “since the Dimensions show protest, increasingly violent threats have been made to members of our student body…entire communities are being targeted and harassed.” The letter then quotes the standards of conduct that they had just violated, noting that “students are ‘expected to be sensitive to and respectful of the rights and interests of others.’”

The letter can be referring to two different forms of speech. The first, of course, is simple offense – saying something politically incorrect or hurtful that does not fall under the umbrella of harassment. As The Dartmouth Review has stated countless times, such talk should fall under the banner of free speech and should not be illegal at any level. Under the same principle, the protesters should not be punished for the content of their protest itself. Of course, any disgusting abuse of free speech should be condemned. The other, more concerning aspect of speech is, of course, overt threats. As #realtalk has catalogued online, a number of threats were made on the Dartmouth-exclusive social networking site bored@baker. Rumors are also spreading of harassment over the phone and in person.

As most Dartmouth students know, bored@baker is a message board that requires its users to register with Dartmouth email addresses. Absent a series of “personalities,” every post is made completely anonymously. Users can “agree” or “disagree” with posts. As such, the site has long been host to a series of opinions that doubtlessly would not have been said in an anonymity-free environment. Seeing as how the protesters deeply offended a majority of the campus, the response on (and off, for that matter) bored@baker was vociferous. Many posts directly attacked the protesters, calling them a variety of terrible epithets. A few called for the publishing of the involved demonstrators’ names; a few could even be legally construed as threats.

While such threats are indeed wrong, the way in which the administration is handling this incident is setting a dangerous precedent. When an illegal, disruptive and widely unpopular protest leads to the administration cancelling classes for the first time since 1986, it sends the message that violence is a justifiable means of instigating discussion. If halting classes truly makes students safer or ceases the harassment, then that’s good, but it cannot change the morality or legality of the protest. The administration ought to pursue justice and the rule of law by punishing those who committed or threatened violence in the past week, no matter their viewpoint. Harassment, even when hidden behind a cloak of anonymity, violates the law and the standards of the College. The same is true for violence, even when it is hidden behind a cause. The administration should treat all transgressions according to their legal ramifications and should make sure that this protest and the unfortunate reaction online does not result in the unthinking fulfillment of the protesters’ goals. Rewarding violence is no way to run a college. Neither is tolerating threats.

Nevertheless, we urge everyone to participate in the discussions tomorrow, so that the true voice of the student body is heard. The Dartmouth Review has written of the true “silent majority” on campus: students who love Dartmouth and its traditions. Although we do not like the manner in which these discussions were brought about, we hope that you will remain silent no longer. Protect what’s great about Dartmouth and, at the same time, join the discussion about how to improve it and restore peace to the campus. Despite the administration’s mismanagement, the harassment seen online, and the violence of the Dimensions protest, tomorrow is a real opportunity to make this wonderful place even better. 

--Nicholas S. Duva & J.P. Harrington

Note: An earlier version of this article read that Wednesday was the 23rd of April. This is clearly false and has been amended to the 24th of April. 

Former TDR Editor Appears on Jeopardy! and Wins First Round

Former Editor-in-Chief of The Dartmouth Review, Forbes Top 30 Under 30 for Law & Policy, and Bush White House aide Michael Ellis appeared on Jeopardy! on Monday April 22nd where he was victorious! He has had quite the career in both conservative politics and law. Mr. Ellis was lucky and talented enough to clerk for Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Tune in to see him make Dartmouth College and TDR proud - and hopefully take home a significant amount of money. We were lucky enough to interview him before both about the process of Jeopardy! as well as his thoughts on his career and the College. His opinion on the College and the process of shifting towards a Dartmouth University is particularly relevant and timely. 

The Dartmouth Review: How did you decide to try out for Jeopardy? What was the application process like? 

Michael Ellis: I watched Jeopardy pretty regularly growing up, and my mother had actually tried out for the show a few years back, so I was familiar with the application process. But nonetheless I decided to try out on somewhat of a lark. In January 2012 I took the online test that Jeopardy offers twice a year. You don’t need to have any special qualifications for the test. It’s just 50 open-ended questions, and you have 15 seconds to respond to each one, effectively eliminating the possibility of someone looking up any answers on, say, Google or Wikipedia. After you complete the online test, they don’t tell you how many questions you answered correctly. You just have to wait for a call to find out if you’ve advanced to the next round. In late April, they called me and invited me to come to an audition in Cleveland. I trekked up to Cleveland where I took another 50-question test and did a practice game. In the practice game, I’m pretty sure they were looking to see if the prospective contestants were quick on their feet and had personality or something interesting going on in their lives. That audition was in May, and in the months after I more or less forgot about the tryout. But in November they called me out of the blue, and invited me to come out to L.A. to tape an episode of the show.

The dashing Mr. Ellis in his Forbes photo.

TDR: How did the taping process work?

Ellis: I went out to L.A. in early December for the taping. My wife and my parents came too and sat in the audience. It turns out they film about five shows a day, so if you win your game and advance to the next round, you don’t even have to fly back to L.A. The “next day” is actually only about 20 minutes later. But anyway, before I filmed my episode, I was kept in a holding area, sequestered from anyone involved in writing the clues, with probably about fifteen other people who were going to be on the show that day. They don’t tell you in advance against whom you’ll be competing, but when they’re ready to start filming, someone comes to the front of the room and calls out three people, and off you go.

Click to read more ...

Inside the Dimensions Debacle

Earlier tonight, as has already been reported, a group of Dartmouth students interrupted the Dimensions show, which was at Class of 1953 Commons. An attempt to differentiate our accepted students’ weekend from the bland affairs at other colleges, the show features a quirky set of song-and-dance routines. Most memorably, freshmen traditionally pretend to be “prospies” and then burst from the stunned crowd. Beloved by current students, the show was saved from an administrative attempt to end it by a vociferous student response.

Throughout the past two days, representatives from an as of yet unknown group had been stepping in on events all over campus, raising awareness over issues on campus like sexism, homophobia, and racism. Chalk writings were commonplace, saying much the same thing. Much like “Occupy Dartmouth” last year, students handed out flyers, reporting sexual assault statistics and incidents of discrimination on campus.

This year, though, this group took their effort a step further than Occupy Dartmouth had. As noted, members of the group burst into Class of 1953 Commons in the middle of the Dimensions show. Not only did the students enter the event uninvited, they did so under false pretenses. Most had the green wristbands on that designated prospies as prospies. Nevertheless, a group of upperclassmen attempted to physically stop the group coming in from the main foyer. The upperclassmen were soon overpowered, and the group entered the main hall.

The group moved in in the middle of a skit. Nevertheless, they immediately began chanting that they had a “public service announcement” for the assembled prospies. They proceeded to rattle off a list of grievances, including but not limited to sexual assault, racism,  and the appropriation of a Native American as the Dartmouth mascot. Throughout the time they were on stage – one source said three to four minutes, another thought it was closer to ten – they kept returning to one central theme: “Dartmouth has a problem.”

According to a source sitting amongst the “Seventeens,” in the crowd, there was a general aura of confusion. The intrusion took place not long after the “fake prospies” had shocked the crowd by revealing that they were freshmen, and, as such, the real prospies were not sure what to believe. There was an awful lot of mumbling in the crowd: for a while, nobody was sure as to whether or not the interruption was part of the show.

Another source, one of the “fake prospies,” noted a different mindset. Although the Dimensions team reacted quickly to try and force the group out, their constant, belligerent yelling forced the team to let them be. After that attempt failed, an aura of resignation and anger began to pervade. As the source noted, the group had practiced most days in the past month, often for hours on end. The group, in their eyes, had rudely interrupted something that the freshmen had worked so hard on over the last few weeks. Some reportedly cried behind the curtain.

As multiple sources, prospies and students alike, have stated, the demonstrators were forced off in a particularly inspiring manner. A prospy – not a student, not someone in the skit – started a “We Love Dartmouth” chant. Within seconds, the entire crowd caught on, chanting until the protesters skulked off the stage. After the group exited, Ashton Slatev, the head of the show, made a quick speech about how Dartmouth isn’t perfect, but that there are an awful lot of people that nevertheless love the school. And the show went on.

The show generally went on without a hitch from thereon in. Prospies and students alike characterized the protest as a “speed bump” in the general tenor of the show. If anything, some students were thoroughly bored by the demonstration, making them await the latter part of the show even more. Many saw the intrusion as absurd. For most, the protest seems to have had little impact.

Although some Seventeens may have brushed off the incident, this demonstration is, unfortunately, important. The College will likely suffer yet another negative blow to its reputation. First and foremost, the regional or national press is likely to pick up this episode sooner than later. And second, this is because, despite the general apathy displayed by the prospies, some students have undoubtedly been affected by the presentation. For people on the fence about Dartmouth – especially minorities and women – this very well could be the force that compels them to choose another school.

This leads into the great irony of this demonstration. The protesters, good intentions aside, ostensibly attempted to bring attention to issues on campus dearly important to them. But by highlighting the level of racism, sexual assault, and homophobia (accurate or not) at Dartmouth, the group will end up scaring away the very people that would have otherwise agreed with them. In short, this protest may very well make the Class of 2017 less diverse, of ethnicity, sexual orientation, and belief alike. It may reverse many of the gains the admissions office has painstakingly made in attempting to recruit a wide-ranging student body. This cannot be what the group set out to accomplish when it set foot in Class of 1953 Commons.

Not only did the group likely scare off certain Seventeens, it delegitimized the opinions of those who share its viewpoints. There are of course people who believe that the levels of racism, sexual assault, and homophobia at Dartmouth are unacceptably high; there are of course people that agree on the same solutions to those perceived problems. But because this group decided to interrupt the Dimensions show in such a boorish manner, it creates the unfair perception that all that espouse its views are similarly coarse. Whatever movement this group is a part of, they’ve set it back immeasurably. Out of every possible platform, the protesters decided to choose the near-sacred Dimensions show, pulling off the unenviable double feat of scaring Seventeens off from Dartmouth and deeply insulting the students that had worked so hard to put on this show. The extremely PR-conscious administration, presumably a friend to the protesters’ underlying ideals, cannot have been pleased with their display. There are likely few segments at Dartmouth that are not angry with the demonstrators right now.

Nobody won tonight. Performers saw their work marred. Prospies were given a false taste of Dartmouth that they may very well find unpalatable. The administration and admissions office saw their meticulous efforts go up in smoke. And the demonstrators’ future protests are likely to fall on deaf ears.

The one, great positive of the night is the inspiring manner in which the show continued. Again, a “We Love Dartmouth” chant silenced the protesters: and that chant came not from a student, but from a prospy. Despite the efforts of the demonstrators, it seems that the spirit of Dartmouth truly did get through to the Seventeens. 

--Nicholas S. Duva

Correction: An earlier version of this article read "when it set food." The typo has been corrected to read "when it set foot." Thank you to the hawk-eyed readers who pointed this out. 

NYC Admitted Student Reception Invites...Rejected Applicants

On the heels of the news that our admissions rates have eased back up in to double digits, there comes this delightful little tidbit. Apparently, the people at the Admissions Department didn't perform the basic task of checking their invitation list. According to the attached letter which was sent out today, the Admissions Department simply invited both rejected and admitted applicants to the admitted student reception. So not only are we rejecting less people nowadays, we're also giving them false hope. 

A screenshot of the infamous email.

We were the only Ivy League institution who saw their acceptance rate increase and become easier. We are now in the elite group of Ivies with double digit acceptance rates: UPenn, Columbia and Cornell. Maybe we should just cement our status as a second-tier institution and change our name to University along with our other three friends.

Or maybe we could just start cutting out the incompetent people who can't figure out how invitation lists work.

--J.P. Harrington