THE STUDENT PRINCE

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

Your November 1 article entitled "Student Prince" attracted our attention for several reasons, and deserves some comment. In the first place, it had the merit of not completely ignoring the facts. In the second place, some of the "facts" were erroneous.

The Princetonian's editorial policies, for example, are not determined by the Chairman alone. They are not, it is true, subjects of "heated arguments lasting as long as an hour;" but they are the objects of a vote by the Senior Board, and the products of the majority's consensus. For this reason, the Chairman is not the author of "virtually all the editorials," or even of a majority of them.

The implication that the Princetonian is primarily concerned with inanities such as dance weekends is another inaccuracy. Consider the difference between the CRIMSON and the Princetonian: the CRIMSON incorporates national and international news into its columns, while the Princetonian, feeling that this job is competently handled by the New York and Philadelphia papers, devotes its news space to events of campus significance. This sometimes does limit the range of our editorial topics, but it includes the NDEA as well as student activities; and to imply, as the article did, that we would give news preference to club party schedules over a statesman's speech or a significant University action is as absurd as it is unverifiable....

And here is the significant point at issue. Princeton is the object of many attacks, and with few exceptions they are all distorted by one thing: prejudice. A man comes to the campus from other Ivy schools with the "Princeton image" fixed in his mind, and in the day or two he is here he tends only to see that evidence which supports his preconceptions. This attitude is partially a product of unfamiliarity and misinformation, and partly the product of an unwillingness to see through the veil of loyalty to his own alma mater. But to base an article on such attitudes; and thereby to suggest as "Student Prince" did, that because one school is different from another it is Ipso facts inferior, is dangerously to approach the fault from which the CRIMSON is generally so free: irresponsible journalism. Ballard's article was rightly confined to the CRIMSON's editorial page. Perhaps he should read ours for a more accurate representation of the Princeton man's interests. James F. Robinson,   Editorial Chairman,   The Daily Princetonian.