Quote:
Originally Posted by Low C Sharp
Isn't this true of a Greek system, and an individual chapter, as well? Hundreds of chapters have gone under due to unpopularity with their target audience. It behooves them just as much to be careful how the actions of one member may alienate another group of students.
At any rate, I wasn't arguing that the paper shouldn't have seen it coming, nor that the Greeks at UIUC didn't have a right to boycott the paper if they wanted to. I'm arguing that if they exercised that right based on one editorial, that was an ugly decision and reflects poorly on the system.
|
No - it is not true of the Greek system. "Hundreds of chapters" have not gone under because of the actions of ONE member. A few dozen have lost charters because of the stupid actions of members which had legal/moral consequences. Other chapters have gone under due to campus culture, and some have because of an inability to effectively recruit which you may call "unpopularity". But to make an analogy between a newspaper's need to not tick off its readership and the fact that a chapter might not be popular with every possible pnm is ridiculous. Chapters' popularity is much more nuanced than the situation with an overtly hostile editorial.
"Reflects poorly on the system"? Really? Choosing not to support a business which is obviously biased against you reflects poorly on you?
HYPERBOLE IS THE BEST THING EVER!