When I introduced the 139th Managing Board of The Daily Princetonian in my first Letter from the Editor in February, I wrote that the new group of editors planned to work constructively with the Princeton community throughout our year at the helm of the paper.
Throughout the course of this last semester, we have been hard at work in our newsroom producing content. We covered protests and petitions, referenda and reforms, admission and academics. We sought to share the facts behind controversies and events with our readers, and we sought the perspectives and voices of members of our community.I wrote this in my last letter, but I think it bears repeating: This newspaper cannot operate in a vacuum; we are nothing without you, the Princeton community.
That is why we are asking for your feedback. Today we are introducing a reader survey through which we would like to learn more about how you connect to us. We want to ensure that the content is easily accessible to our readers and we want to constantly strive to ensure that our content is what you want to see and of the highest quality.
All feedback is welcome through our online reader survey, which can be found at this link: goo.gl/7yX1sV. In addition to this feedback form, we encourage you to send us an email with your thoughts on our content throughout the year at eic@dailyprincetonian.com.
This is the last paper we will print during the semester, but we will publish again during Reunions. We will then be back to our regular publishing schedule in September when classes start. Until then, we will continue to publish online throughout the summer. Keep in touch!
Anna Mazarakis, a politics major from Montclair, N.J., is the Editor-in-Chief of The Daily Princetonian. She can be reached at annacm@princeton.edu.
Read More
Don’t let campus progressives define themselves out of debate
Zach Gardner“Free speech is not a principle which falls neatly on one side of the political divide. Debate, the natural result of free speech properly understood, doesn’t dole out benefits based on ideology — at least it shouldn’t. It provides a forum in which divergent parties can dissect their disagreements.”
“Free speech is not a principle which falls neatly on one side of the political divide. Debate, the natural result of free speech properly understood, doesn’t dole out benefits based on ideology — at least it shouldn’t. It provides a forum in which divergent parties can dissect their disagreements.”
For the sake of a democratic process, faculty must reject remote voting on previously decided motions
Guest Contributors"To implement a remote electronic vote that will enable a segment of those voting to opt out of the deliberation stage undermines our institutional traditions. When we meet as faculty, we aim to deliberate and govern together. That role cannot be reduced to casting votes."
"To implement a remote electronic vote that will enable a segment of those voting to opt out of the deliberation stage undermines our institutional traditions. When we meet as faculty, we aim to deliberate and govern together. That role cannot be reduced to casting votes."
Excessive careerism is leading us astray from the humanities
Lily Halbert-Alexander“We should model our educational paths based on our genuine intellectual interests, rather than making our academic decisions solely based on whatever we think we want to do with our lives at 18.”
“We should model our educational paths based on our genuine intellectual interests, rather than making our academic decisions solely based on whatever we think we want to do with our lives at 18.”
