VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8], 9 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Wed March 16, 2005 10:02:11
Author: 70sRam
Subject: Without being disrespectful, this isn't a case of alums wistfully looking at the past. From a journalistic standpoint, the Ram was significantly better then than it is today. The writing was clearer and more professional, as was the choice of what to print. My issue with the Olean column (and it's not worth getting canned over) is that the topic is stereotyped and simplistic -- people in Olean are overweight and slow, and besides, they're not from NYC; gee that's clever. The column is what's called a "throwaway" in the business. That the writer turned it in is unfortunate. That the editors thought it worth running is what makes us believe that the quality of the paper is not what it used to be. If it was heavily edited, I can't imagine what it looked like originally; if it ran as he typed it, well that's your quality issue. I think if any writers for the Ram in the 70s and 80s had handed in piece like this, it would have come sailing back at us in a crumpled ball.
In reply to: Worried RAM 's message, "I'm not gonna keep this debate up. The article was not that bad. Better word choice could have been used, but I feel it has been blown out of proportion. The Ram is a fine college publication. The editors do a fine job and represent Fordham well. Even though I have never read The Ram in the 70's and 80's, I feel some of the criticism about how the Ram was so much better back then is unfair and a biased opinion of students of that generation. They should take pride in The Ram during their Fordham days, but I'm sure The Ram ruffled some feathers in those days as well. The present Ram provides a fine caliber of journalism." on Wed March 16, 2005 04:31:25


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

  • Every opinion is by definition a bias but that doesn't mean the opinion is incorrect. It is quite possible that those Ram staff alumni from the 70's and 80's are not only correct, but in a very good position to make that determination. It's an open secret amongst those in higher education that there is rampant grade inflation at the high school level, and that many students are coming into colleges unprepared for what faces them (poor writing and research skills, for example). And yes, this includes students from supposedly prestigious prep schools and elite public schools, and it's being felt at even the nation's top schools. There are many reasons for this beyond the scope of this discussion but it is reasonable to conclude Fordham is not immune from the problem. In fact, I've even seen the problem firsthand in the admissions interviews I've done. (NT) -- DamnRam, Wed March 16, 2005 10:02:14
  • A major reason why writing skills of high school students, college students, and recent graduates are not strong is that they have grown up using methods of written communication that value immediacy of expression over accuracy of expression: message boards, emails, instant messaging, and the like. Rules of punctuation, capitilization, and grammar are often not observed when immediacy is the goal. These rules can become forgotten when not applied, or perhaps even never learned completely. When I write on this message board, I try to give some thought to what I'm saying, but I don't labor over it the way I labor over a legal brief I'm sending to a court. And that's the problem. Young writers today not only don't labor over what they write, they've never been taught to labor over what they write. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Wed March 16, 2005 11:12:12
  • Well, like I said i never read the Ram in those days, maybe I'l try to find some to compare it with today. You guys could be right, but as in most conversations about past versus present (and especially me being from the new generation) to me a mentality of "we were better back then", while we tend to see that progress is being made. Both mentalities are not disrespectful but instead a showing of pride in their own work. I know part of the problem is that there was an article that ruffled some feathers in the first issue it was online. I hope you can agree that The Ram is a fine college paper that compares favorably to many other schools(esp the others I have seen) and keeps up Fordham fine tradition .If you don't agree thats fine. Have a Good Day. (NT) -- Worried RAM, Wed March 16, 2005 12:43:11
    [ Contact Forum Admin ]

    Forum timezone: GMT-5
    VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
    Before posting please read our privacy policy.
    VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
    Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.