For our Editorial Board meeting last month, Don Goss '53 analyzed a selected sample of respondents to the Magazine survey questionnaire that we ran in the May issue. His very thorough presentation, while not altogether surprising, contained some interesting findings.
A caveat: the total number of respondents was very small in proportion to the total alumni body - some 500 forms were returned out of a circulation of more than 42,000. So I suppose it's wise to keep in mind the same maxim - cum grano salis that I use with respect to Letters to the Editor. (This is simply one way of reminding myself that people who are pleased with the way things are don't always take the time to write; or put another way, there is probably a disproportionately large number of letters from those who are disaffected about one thing or another at the College.) The irrepressible Mr. Goss concluded that reader interest was skewed by age, that there was "a substantial range in reader interest in terms of specific editorial ingredients," and that there was enough direction in the results to help us determine what readers would like to see us emphasize and what to cut.
In the categories that respondents indicated they were satisfied with or wanted more of, curriculum was at the top of the list, with three areas - "news about noteworthy faculty/administration," "news of noteworthy alumni lifestyles/activities," and "news about students" - bunched together. Significantly down the list followed "news about non-College activities in Hanover" and "discussion of controversial topics." And at the very bottom of the list was "news about fund-raising activities." (Ahem . . .)
In areas that readers wanted more of, features topped the chart, though it was worth noting that the younger classes were more heavily in favor of this than the older classes. The clear winner (read loser) in the category "less emphasis" was book reviews, with sports a distant second, and Letters to the Editor and the Editor's Remarks column close behind. We've designed a new format for book reviews which should make everyone a lot happier: we'll photograph the book jackets of major books and write short summaries to give prospective readers a more timely idea of the books' contents.
Sports, as they say at the track, is a horse of a different color. The opinion is pretty evenly split between those who want it emphasized and those who don't. Perhaps it's a reflection of the current state of Big Green athletics, or maybe it lies deeper than that. In any case, trying to write interesting features month after month about varsity teams that are 3-23 for the season and near the bottom of the heap in sport after sport is just that - trying. (I found it particularly disheartening this fair to find a Boston Globe columnist refer to Dartmouth as one of the Ivy "patsies" that the Harvard football team had beaten.) But sports have been an integral part of .the Dartmouth experience for too many people and for too long to cut too drastically. Just how we will handle that department remains to be seen. Letters to the Editor is your forum, and we don't plan any major changes there; as for this column, well, let's just say it doesn't have a very secure future.
A representative sampling of answers to "What does the Magazine not do?" includes: Come out on time; concentrate on key issues; take a position on College issues; drop the Indian symbol, ROTC, and other trite controversies; have a balanced, not left-handed editorial tilt; recognize the intellect of the audience; feature non-business alumni; and be less a tool of the Administration.
Some of those suggestions have merit and some are wide of the mark. For example, it's certainly not the purpose of the Magazine to take positions on College issues, but rather to try to present the news of the College objectively and to give alumni a forum for their views. As anyone who's ever heard of the Indian symbol controversy knows, even a family as closely knit as Dartmouth is far too heterogeneous to have but one view on anything. Now as for the comment about our being an Administration tool, I'll be the first to admit that it's hard to be impartial about this place. But that impartiality comes from within, not from Parkhurst.