Criticism in an open forum does not exclude criticism of the open forum itself. When an article was submitted to The Dispatch criticizing its humor, Tim “Prime Minister of Dispatch Humor” Schwab ‘08 had to go see exactly where his beloved publication is faltering. A bit defensive and wanting to hear how to improve The Dispatch, he went to interview the author of the article, Asher Miller ’08.
Dispatch: So, you’re very critical of The College Dispatch this week for being unoriginal. Your e-mail is amiller2. That’s kind of unoriginal.
Asher Miller:
Dispatch: Really?
AM: My dad was falling off a ladder and he grabbed an electrical line and Asher shook him off the ladder.
Dispatch: In your article this week, you tell us that we’re cynical tripe. Am I getting that right?
AM: Yeah, sarcastic and repetitive.
Dispatch: So, do you think The Dispatch should have more serious articles?
AM: Well, as I see it, the serious articles in The Dispatch are all about stuff people already know about. So, I think that you should have professors write the articles.
Dispatch: Just professors?
AM: Or really, really smart people.
Dispatch: Don’t you think it’s beneficial to have something that is an open forum? I mean The College Reporter has word limits and the pieces are heavily edited. With The Dispatch there is no word limit and editing goes through the authors. Isn’t there a benefit to having such a forum on campus, even with sarcastic quips?
AM: I think it’s absolutely wonderful to have an open forum, and I think it is absolutely wonderful to criticize that. Criticism is what you do in The Dispatch. I see articles in The Dispatch where some tear other people’s opinions apart. To do it they minimize their scope and focus on one little thing. They’re both wrong.
Dispatch: So, do you think we should have some sort of arbiter that declares everybody wrong?
AM:
