314 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
As Rutgers students, we need to let it be known that the Daily Targum Board of Trustees does not represent us. Some readers may be wondering who the members on Board of Trustees are, and that is a huge part of the problem. Why is this group, a group that is not mentioned anywhere on the Targum website, exercising control over what can and can’t be published in the Targum? Why do they operate with zero transparency and without any apparent accountability from the student body? The Daily Targum is a student newspaper, founded by students for students. We fund the Targum. Without the $10.75 addition to our term bill we pay each semester, the school newspaper could not continue. Why, then, is the Targum not being independently run by the students, but rather being controlled by an enigmatic group we know virtually nothing about?
My beloved Targum — how you never fail to stir up controversy semester after semester. With that Tyler Clementi editorial debacle back in 2010 or a microcosmic version of the Israel-Palestine conflict played out across the Opinions page or the cheeky piece on V-Day cunnilingus, The Daily Targum has pissed off many and pleased few. And once again, the Targum is in the spotlight as one former opinions editor attempts to expose a problem with the Targum’s infrastructure that undermines the integrity of the campus newspaper as an unbiased fixture at Rutgers University. While I have no desire to involve myself in the petty personal dramas unfolding around this pressing issue of campus newspaper censorship, allow me to weigh in for a second with my own experiences of working on The Daily Targum editorial board for three years between 2010 and early 2013.
The beast has reared its ugly head once again — and no, I’m not referring to the snow or the unloved dog with two noses making its way around the Internet. Valentine’s Day is upon us, and I know this because I walked into a drug store recently and had my eyes assaulted by the heinous tokens of American commercialism Hallmark would call “gifts for your valentine.”
The fable of Steve Jobs is now ubiquitous in American culture. Most people know about his orphaned upbringing, his endearment for electronics and his innovate spirit. Disciples regale the masses with tales of his courage, dropping out of college and “finding himself” (through rebellious scholastic enthusiasm as well as the hallucinogenic drugs he consumed). He then created one of the most illustrious corporations in the world with Apple, which he subsequently mutinied. Later, he purchased what would become the biggest animation studio ever, Pixar, which he promptly left, returning as CEO and prodigal son of the original brand. Apple was in utter disarray upon his return, yet Jobs was able to right the ship and steer them to great heights. This is the folklore of the 21st century, inspiring millions to follow in his ingenious footsteps. But should it be?
As one of the most diverse universities in the country, Rutgers prides itself on the multitude of opinions and ideas that arise from both ends of the campus. The student body continues to witness a community of thriving ideas, opinions and debate. Unfortunately, such a large and diverse community does not always allow for easy individual access to the plethora of opinions floating throughout the student body, which sometimes results in arrogance and disrespect.
A commonly accepted social norm in in our culture is that the level of intimacy male friends can show towards each other is considerably less than the level that female friends can show towards each other. This kind of attitude permeates in many ways and often spills over into the relationships of many women and men. If there are two women holding hands, one might consider it a platonic way of expressing affection for each other. However, replace that with two men holding hands, and people make reference to Ken Jeong from “Community” shouting “haha, gay!” from the back of a classroom.
A short and rapid two months ago, the majestic purple mountains of western America seemed to be a treasure trove waiting to be exploited for our governor. With brigades on top of brigades of loyal Republican supporters raised up in arms all over the country, the electoral college of our great country seemed to only be a pawn in the grand scheme of Gov. Chris Christie’s ambitions. In those two months, I wrote an article stating the asserted dominance held in the grasps of the Republican governors palms over the fate over not only the state of New Jersey but also potentially the presidential race of 2016 with the weakening strength of the Democratic Party in recent months. However, the world of politics is fickle and unrelenting as the political throne of America shifts back and forth between parties without consent. With the new and career-damaging news of the Bridgegate scandal, the land of promise and opportunities now only seems to be a distant memory in Christie’s America.
We are Chabad House at Rutgers University, and I am writing in reference to the controversial article written by Colleen Jolly and printed in your opinions section. While this article was not directly aimed at Chabad House, but rather its sister organization, the Rutgers Hillel, we feel the obligation to respond due to its underlying implications of bigotry and anti-Semitism.
Could there possibly be any more headlines “frozen” into one football game? Let’s start with the temperature. Of course, the National Football League decides to pick basically the coldest winter on record to experiment with a cold-weather Super Bowl — a winter where more people are familiar with the term “polar vortex” than with who is actually playing in the biggest football game of the year.
After returning home from the USA Sevens international rugby tournament in Las Vegas last week, I’ve been feeling rather confident about the sport’s chances at catching the average American sports fan’s attention.
On Tuesday, The Daily Targum published a commentary by a student entitled “Academic freedom should be free and unrestricted,” which addressed the recent vote of the American Studies Association to boycott Israeli academic institutions, referring to the action as “unethical and unwise.”
1. Give $18 million to Carl Levitt.
In late 2013, the American Studies Association, a scholarly organization comprised mainly of American Studies professors across the United States, elected to boycott Israeli universities and academic institutions. The organization argued that an academic boycott of Israel would help ease Palestinian suffering and help lead to a peaceful resolution. The American Studies Association counts a number of Rutgers professors as members.
This commentary has been retracted. A response from The Daily Targum was published in the paper on Monday, Jan. 27, 2014. Read here.
If there is anything Rutgers University grips onto for campus pride, it’s most likely their dynamic diversity. Only at Rutgers can I walk down most streets and hear at least three different languages combined with six different accents on my way to class. Yet, university officials feel it’s best to improve its reputation by focusing on absurdities like a failing football program and its merger to the Big 10.
The winter season is upon us and so concludes another semester “On the Banks of the Old Raritan.” These past few months have been fraught with exciting changes for our university. The integration of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and our acceptance into the Big Ten athletic conference has opened a door of new possibilities for research and involvement. The Rutgers University Student Assembly, our student government, has been hard at work to ensure these new opportunities are serving the students’ best interests and is accessible to all.
While the University’s apparent response to Hurricane Sandy is a step in the right direction, many more steps are needed in a great variety of areas. A few local problems, have plagued Cook Campus departments for decades, and in this case, it happens to be the one I work in. By no means is this a complete list. Literally hundreds of other infrastructural problems have plagued our campus: From extensive heat outages lasting for months at a time, to intentional, secret electrical disconnections of every toxic fume hood in the building, to persistent natural gas leaks. Cook Campus has one electrician for 100 buildings. The list of problems goes on forever. Rutgers Vice President Richard Edwards told me personally that there exists no budgetary provisions for the maintenance any of the new buildings going up all over the University. Maintenance funds come from wherever possible — but not the football budget that is running about $28 million in deficit each year.
Have you ever wondered why students pay such high interest rates to borrow funds for education? If you haven’t, you should. The logical answer is that loans to students with no income are risky. This is completely true. But my bets are that private lenders are not charging only for the additional risk. They are also taking advantage of unsophisticated, unsuspecting student borrowers, as well as not being fully transparent about the rates borrowers may or may not qualify for.
There has been a very generous amount of attention paid to Stan NcNeil. I say generous because it certainly reflects the student body wanting to give more of something than is strictly necessary or expected to this otherwise quotidian end of an employee’s career. The Daily Targum’s opinion poll — which, I must confess, is the most pathetic of newspaper tools — currently reads with 55 percent of students supporting the position that “he didn’t do anything to interfere with the responsibilities of his job.” I write this polemic mainly to combat the egregious lack of opposition to this and in the wake of student protests and petitions for his reinstatement.
Over the past couple of weeks, the Rutgers University Student Assembly, or RUSA, has been trying to figure out what is really on student’s minds when it comes to issues that they face at the University. The student government is comprised of only sixty students with sixty unique viewpoints. In order for RUSA to know what students want to see fixed at the University, we need to hear from you!