Put yourself on Student Senate’s agenda
Ohio University’s Student Senate voted last week to delay the election for vice president so the general student body would have a chance to vote. That’s you, and this is your chance.
Voter turnout in the annual senate elections is notoriously low. Last spring, only 2,313 students submitted an online ballot, which is less than 12 percent of OU’s more than 20,000 on-campus undergraduate student population. Ultimately, it was the 1,342 people who voted for the winning VOICE ticket who determined that Nick Southall, who resigned in December after an arrest for disorderly intoxication, deserved the president’s seat.
The lackadaisical voter response might be evidence that students don’t feel senate’s effect on campus enough to care about who is elected. We can’t blame you for thinking that. Senate’s recent history shows that the group is better at making headlines than effective policies. Its endless controversy has made senate look like an out-of-touch organization that is more concerned about politicking than working for the students.
But the truth is that this body, in theory, represents you. And if you don’t take an active role in voting for your student representatives while you have the chance, it will only ensure that the candidates with the brightest T-shirts and the most free swag make it into office in the future, whether they’re the best ones for the job or not.
We urge you to vote online at the link provided in the university-wide email between the hours of 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Wednesday.
Your vote for the next senate vice president probably won’t be the most important ballot you ever cast, but it’s an opportunity to remind senate that you exist and that you plan to hold them accountable.
Show senate that you’re paying attention to them, and maybe in the future they’ll do the same for you.
Access dilemma recalls famous example
“Frank Sinatra Has a Cold”
That was the title of Gay Talese’s seminal profile of the legendary performer that was published in the April 1966 issue of Esquire.
The article is often considered to be one of the best profiles in recent history and continues to be studied today in journalism classes — all despite Sinatra’s refusal to be interviewed for the piece.
Talese was able to paint a vividly descriptive picture of Ol’ Blue Eyes and his lifestyle by doggedly following Sinatra for months and interviewing everyone in his entourage who would talk.
Similar to how Talese was denied access to his subject, Post senior writer Christian Hoppens wasn’t permitted by Ohio Athletics to speak with men’s basketball player Ricardo Johnson for an article about him that was published on today’s front page.
Hoppens had been pursuing an article about Johnson, a senior guard and team leader, in the wake of a Jan. 4 injury that left him unable to compete for the remainder of the season.
Because Ohio Athletics almost always limits reporters’ access to injured athletes, Hoppens was unable to include Johnson’s point of view in the article.
Rather than nix the story, Hoppens spoke with the players and coaches who interact daily with Johnson and discovered that even though his absence on the court is painful, his presence on the bench can often be a source of inspiration.
Sure, it would have been great to speak with Johnson for the article, but in some ways the end result might be better, because the department’s policy forced Hoppens to dig even deeper.
The profile might not be on the same level as Talese’s exemplary work, but it serves as a reminder to Post reporters and editors to report the news regardless of Sinatra’s cold or Johnson’s fractured leg.
Editorials represent the majority opinion of The Post’s executive editors.
