By Anthony Dempsey
I would like to begin by saying that I am not writing this
submission to criticize any of the slates or candidates that ran
for the Undergraduate Students Association Council this year. I
write to express my disdain for the Daily Bruin and its handling of
candidate endorsements.
I once thought that UCLA was a free place devoted to the
exchange and encouragement of ideas. The Daily Bruin, however, has
succeeded in shredding my belief in UCLA’s brash idealism.
That it holds endorsements for candidates both underscores the role
of the media and insults me as a student.
In today’s world, people have become zombies to the words
that the media speak. Many of us know that the media’s simple
statements are not always completely true, yet most people do not.
In my ignorance of UCLA’s reality, I thought that our Daily
Bruin was different. I presumed that our paper stood for a
different kind of media. I presumed that our paper knew it had an
audience that refused to take a statement at face value. I
obviously presumed wrong.
The Daily Bruin Editorial Board thinks that we, as UCLA
students, must be spoon-fed our opinions. Through its endorsements,
I can only deduce that the board opines that I am incapable of
choosing the candidate that I see fit to represent me in USAC.
Although I have read the articles involving the elections, looked
at flyers and talked to candidates, my brain capacity cannot make
the proper connections to pick a good candidate?
In fact, if we are too ignorant to decide things for ourselves,
why are we even holding elections in the first place? Why
don’t we just have the Daily Bruin appoint our student
government for us?
I cannot help but think back to the scorn I felt for our
founding fathers when I learned that they set up the government in
order to keep the ideas of the common people squelched. It seems to
me that the Daily Bruin Editorial Board, like our founding fathers,
sees me as a “commoner” with “common”
ideas.
The main problem I had with The Bruin’s endorsements,
though, was the utter lack of respect that was given to the
candidates. Every day I find myself surrounded by apathy. For every
illiterate child and adult, there are at least five educated people
who refuse to devote any effort toward tackling the problem of
illiteracy. Even on this campus, where community service and
responsibility are considered such important values, apathy
abounds.
On the other hand, every student running for USAC, whether
endorsed or not, not only cares about this school, but has devoted
a massive amount of their time and energy to this community. For
example, one of the candidates who was not endorsed dropped two
classes and put in more than $100 of her own money to run for
student government. What does The Bruin’s Editorial Board say
to such devotion?
It utilizes phrases like, “dictator,”
“doesn’t seem to have a clue,”
“surface-level” and “warped.” Our paper,
which so loftily claims the need for diversity on this campus,
illustrates its utter misunderstanding for that very idea in the
lack of esteem it gives to the students of this campus, especially
those who ran for student government.
For diversity to truly swell on this campus, first and foremost,
we must have respect for one another. But how can we begin to
respect each other if our paper so easily spits in the faces of
people who are actually concerned about this community?
I want nothing more than to gain the confidence that I once had
for UCLA students, yet The Bruin’s reaction toward USAC
candidates makes me believe that UCLA’s idealism is merely a
charade.
For now, though, I can only applaud all those candidates who
worked into the late hours of the night, spent time making signs
and stood for hours on campus handing out flyers ““ all so I
would have a better experience at UCLA. Further, I charge The Bruin
to examine itself as a UCLA paper and apologize to both the campus
community and the candidates who it insulted.