As an active member of the Student Union and a writer for innermostparts.org the article in “The Hoot,” by Ariel Wittenberg, about the blog disturbed me. The premise of the article was based on one post by Phil Lacombe ’10, who tried to claim that a Brandeis Progressive Party had been formed and was gaining power in the Student Union. This claim is simply false; to my knowledge there is no Progressive Party, and if it exists it has no members in the Brandeis Student Union. Unfortunately, Wittenberg chose to portray the ‘party’ as though it were a debate. She writes, “The issue of whether or not Innermost Parts constitutes a Political Party is one that neither the writers of the blog nor other Student Union members agree upon.” Having spoken with the other alleged members of this ‘party,’ I know that there is no debate; there simply is no party, no question about it.

So why then are writers and members of the innermostparts.org community running for positions in the Student Union? I would think it is rather obvious; we are people who are concerned with issues on Brandeis and want to be able to do something about them. That’s why we write for innermostparts.org and that’s why we work in the Student Union. We have no unified agenda other than the same agenda that all members of the Student Union share; we want to make Brandeis better. By portraying us as a political party, Wittenberg simply creates more divides than necessary in the Student Union; we need to be able to work with our colleagues without them thinking we have a hidden agenda. I was simply amazed that Wittenberg failed to interview any of the members of the Senate she and Lacombe accused of being a part of this ‘party,’ perhaps then she would have understood that there is no debate; there simply is no party.

4 comments on “The Hoot Got it Wrong: There is no Debate, There is no Party.”

  1. Carrie Says:

    I hear ya, Lev! As a writer for Innermost Parts who is not in the Student Union, I suffered from 20 seconds of solid, uncontrollable laughter when I realized that this non-issue merited a two-page spread in The Hoot. Relatively disconnected from the underlying issue, I find it humerous, but I can imagine that the article might have upset those mentioned within it.

    Two print pages? Really?!

  2. Ariel Says:

    As I have mentioned in a previous comment, I encourage any and all of you to write a letter to the editor of The Hoot and send it to time@brandeis.edu.

    If you have any questions for me about the article, how it was researched, or executed, please feel free to contact me.

    Thanks for reading!

    ~Ariel

  3. Lev Says:

    time@brandeis.edu?

    I’ll probably send an edited version of this in to the Hoot.

  4. Alison Says:

    http://thehoot.net/letter