To the Publishers,
I have lived in Swarthmore for most of my life. I grew up here in the 80s and 90s and returned with my own family in 2014. On the surface, the reasons my husband and I chose Swarthmore are easy to list: family is here; our kids have the freedom and security to ride their own bikes around town; our neighbors know and look out for one another; the schools are wonderful. But there is also something deeper about the character of Swarthmore that drew me back. Growing up in a town where people took thoughtful stances on issues and engaged in respectful debate — especially within the pages of this newspaper — was formative for me. I recall heated discussion here on topics ranging from bamboo to the ethics of the 4th of July goldfish scramble at the pool. I wanted my boys to be exposed to critical thinking and to learn to form an informed opinion.
This is why I was so disappointed to read Satya Nelms’ recent piece on Medium, “Why I Resigned From The Swarthmorean.” She explains that the publishers of this paper asked her and Rachel Pastan to “stop writing so many heavy and racially charged pieces.” They said this was a business decision — that they perceived a critical enough mass of readers who are uncomfortable with the content as to threaten sales.
Why is it okay to discuss animal rights and alcohol sales in The Swarthmorean, but not okay to discuss issues that are core to the way people experience life in Swarthmore? The 80s and 90s were a time when we buried issues of race within polite discourse with platitudes like “everyone is equal.” Satya and Rachel’s recent work has surfaced the hard truth that not everyone experiences the same idyllic Swarthmore that I know and love. Of course it’s not fun to read. But awareness is the first step toward thinking critically and forming informed opinions.
I will miss reading Satya’s content here. But I hope that she finds a platform for it with even broader reach.
Anne Cocos
Swarthmore