<p>Honestly, what's this supposed to mean? They actually use such blunt swearing in the "official" University paper?</p>
<p>Any comments?</p>
<p>Yeah, cornell sucks even more.</p>
<p>This makes me glad I didn’t get accepted.</p>
<p>i like how people accuse columbia of not having any spirit, but then blast it when it ever trash talks.</p>
<p>and spectrum is a blog, not the newspaper, and secondly the spectator is an independent newspaper, not the official university newspaper.</p>
<p>it’s spectrum! they’re a blog, we should be thankful that they can say things however they feel apt, rather than a newspaper which must tone down its language. </p>
<p>on another note: puck frinceton :)</p>
<p>admissionsgeek, I’m just a semi-informed rising junior trying to figure some things out, no need to be so defensive.</p>
<p>Then what is the Columbia’s official newspaper?</p>
<p>adgeek: The thing I like(d) about Columbia’s identity (as nebulous as that sounds) was that it seemed to be above trash-talking.</p>
<p>concoll: It’s not about censorship or freedom of speech. Referring to students of another school as “bastards” in the headline of a Columbia-associated publication is not classy no matter how you slice it.</p>
<p>In my experience, there’s a significant amount of affectionate respect at each Ivy League school for all the others, disguised as over-the-top, witty one-up-manship. I don’t believe for a moment that the headline in question was “trash-talking.” And “classy” is simply inconsistent with over-the-top joshing. I think everyone should relax, and learn to appreciate banter by folks with tongue firmly in cheek. (I guarantee you, you will see a lot of it on campus at any Ivy League college.) Admissionsgeek and confidentialcoll are two of the more helpful contributors to this site. Check out ivy gate blog. com (without the spaces) if you want to see some real “trash-talking” without “class,” although often witty, entertaining and, in my book, respectfully affectionate nonetheless.</p>
<p>Does Columbia have any official university newspaper? </p>
<p>I find it odd that student-run newspaper is independent from the university.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, I don’t believe for a moment that this was “trash-talking” either. Isn’t “trash-talking” normally reserved for something that you’re actually good at??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>On behalf of all people who go to Columbia:</p>
<p>ROTFLMAO that you have this impression of college</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know why anyone should be above trash talking, college is no fun without it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I honestly don’t see this as trash talking (as in look at me look at me, I’m better than you). I think you misunderstand the connotation. It’s just hyperbole and making fun of a stereotype. We don’t actually think Princeton students are bastards, but we don’t treat everyone as if they’re made of glass, so making fun of other schools (and our own) is very much part of Columbia’s identity. If you follow our blogs many headlines are highly self-deprecating. With that, we also call chicago students nerds, brown students damn hippies, MIT students geeks, harvard students arrogant trust fund babies, penn students legacy investment banker wannabes, cornell students farmers who go to state school, barnard students loose, seas students devoid of social skills, and CC students unemployable etc. Other schools probably treat Columbia as crazy liberal activists who won’t see a sliver of a paycheck in the next couple of decades. It makes for somewhat of a camaraderie and requires a slightly thick skin. Just readjust your sense of humor and take things less seriously. </p>
<p>In terms of why blogs like spectrum serve a valuable purpose, they can say something provocative from time to time, and sometimes it offends people, other times it’s funny and other times it reveals a hidden view because newspapers were too conservative to say it.</p>
<p>
Why? Most colleges seem to have a few newspapers. One is generally university sponsored, and this is the one that does most of the reporting. They are probably strongly encouraged to discuss a lot of the university business as well (notable faculty transfers, admissions statistics, housing reports, etc.). Aka not much opinion, slant, or creative articles. Then there are other papers who, although they may like to have the name of the official school paper, would not want to or cannot function with all the baggage that comes with that title. And then there are those that do not want to be official in any way, and are merely a joke paper. </p>
<p>So at a university there are lots of niches for papers. A comedic Onion style paper, a factual official school paper, a political paper or two, etc. One paper cannot take on all of these roles. The first and third papers are generally independent from the university, for obvious reasons. Not to say they aren’t an official club, which generally they are.</p>
<p>well a more direct answer to why it isn’t odd - </p>
<p>how could the newspaper properly report against the university’s interests if it was part of the university. plus the spectator has been independent for nearly 50 years, it is not like it happens over night.</p>
<p>shrugging: i never said that it was good or bad that there is trash talking, i just was pointing out that it is very interesting that folks have this view of columbia as anti-sport and anti-school spirit, and it is hard to say folks don’t have school spirit when they do trash talk.</p>
<p>in the end - you aren’t gonna please everyone, the good news about columbia is that there are plenty of folks that don’t care about athletics, and plenty that do, so you can find your own group.</p>
<p>but if you find the above link appalling, you really ought to see the treatment that the daily princetonian gives columbia from time to time, it is on their actual news articles dismissive. often we are ‘lowly columbia.’ this wasn’t a blog post, but an actual article - [Football:</a> Perennial pushover tops Tigers - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/05/24010/]Football:”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/05/24010/). you should also read the comments on this article [Admission</a> rate rises to 9.79 percent for Class of 2013 - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/04/01/23213/]Admission”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/04/01/23213/). it gives you a flavor for how columbia is not princeton in attitude, even calling them bastards is meek by comparison.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hey now, the newspapers in countries such as China do a fine job of reporting the truth…</p>
<p>where are your quotation marks around that truth? haha.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(i) You can have school spirit without trash talking.</p>
<p>(ii) Those who “accuse columbia of not having any spirit” and those who “blast it when it ever trash talks” may not be the same people.</p>
<p>(iii)
</p>
<p>And can you blame the critics?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/12/13/don-t-worry-cu-fans-football-s-here-stay[/url]”>http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/12/13/don-t-worry-cu-fans-football-s-here-stay</a></p>
<p>objobs - certainly.</p>
<p>though would you or would you not consider the michigan/ohio state to be one of the most heated in college sports? would you or would you not agree that both universities are often considered to have the most pride and school spirit? would you or would you not agree that both schools often partake in childish pranks, name callings and other efforts in order to demonstrate their spirit?</p>
<p>for years i’ve defended columbia’s spirit as being more collegial and perhaps more akin to your first question - it is about a network of friends, not necessarily committed to some athletic cause or competitive spirit. it is more a sense that everyone around you loves the school and because they love the school they got your back if you ask them. i was just engaging in a side bar here - there are times now and then (and frankly almost always involving princeton) where the subtle niceties of life are dismissed for pure immaturity. </p>
<p>i do however find it to be sort of you can never go right situation re: columbia. when it acts proud, it is considered boosting. when it acts subtle, it is considered prideless. in the end there ought to be some sort of consensus, a universal declaration that says “columbia has school spirit.” so that folks can stop being shocked when it displays it - in positive and negative ways - and we can move on from having the lack of school spirit as a myth that folks repeat on here. because it certainly isn’t true.</p>
<p>
My take on this (and I’m only half kidding) is … for any one person if their school or any school lower in the USNews rankings is vocal about their school it is school spirit … for any school ranked higher in the USNews rankings if they are vocal about their shool then they are obnoxious snobs.</p>