Why the Columbia Spectator Sucks

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , on April 1, 2014 by specsucks

In contrast to the standard conception of the Spec as cantankerous obstinate, and ubiquitous in their search for truth and their independence of authority, we at specsucks believe that indeed the Columbia Spectator (spec) serves a societal purpose, not that of enabling the public to assert meaningful control over the campus issues by providing them with the information needed for the intelligent dialogue of campus responsibilities. On the contrary we suggest that the “societal purpose” of the Spec is to inculcate and defend the economic, social, and political agenda of privileged groups that dominate the campus dialogue. The spec serves this purpose in many ways: through selection of topics, distribution of concerns, framing of issues, filtering of information, emphasis and tone, and by keeping debate within the bounds of acceptable premises. If democratic processes are to function in a meaningful way then certain modes of discourse must not be silenced in this manner. But the evidence we have reviewed indicates that this need is not met or even weakly approximated in actual practice.

It is frequently asserted that the spec were not always as independent, vigilant, and defiant of authority as they allegedly are today; rather, the experiences of the past generation are held to have taught the media to exercise the power to root about in our campus life, exposing what they deem right for exposure, without regard to external pressures or the dictates of authority.

Yet we find that the very examples offered in praise of the spec for their independence, or criticism of their excessive zeal, illustrate exactly the opposite. Contrary to the usual image of an “adversary press” boldly attacking a pitiful executive giant of the admins, the Spec’s lack of interest, investigative zeal, and basic news reporting on the accumulating illegalities of the a bloated administration have regularly permitted and even encouraged ever larger violations of our trust, and whose ultimate exposure when elite interests were threatened is offered as a demonstration of media service “on behalf of the polity.” These observations reinforce the conclusions that we have documented throughout our blog. The spec does not function in the manner of the propaganda system of a totalitarian state. Rather, they permit-indeed, encourage spirited debate, criticism, and dissent, as long as these remain faithfully within the system of presuppositions and principles that constitute an elite consensus, a system so powerful as to be internalized largely without awareness.

The student body is exposed to powerful persuasive messages from above and is unable to communicate meaningfully through the media in response to these messages. Student leaders have usurped enormous amounts of political power and reduced popular control over the campus by using the media to generate support, compliance, and just plain confusion among the public. That conclusion is well supported by the evidence we have reviewed. In essence, the spec is a corporation selling a product (readers and audiences) to other businesses (advertisers). The spec typically target and serve elite opinion, groups that, on the one hand, provide an optimal “profile” for advertising purposes, and, on the other, play a role in decision-making in the private and public spheres. The spec would be failing to meet their elite audience’s needs if they did not present a tolerably realistic portrayal of the world. But their “societal purpose” also requires that the spec’s interpretation of the world reflect the interests and concerns of the sellers, the buyers, and the bureaucratic and private institutions dominated by these groups.

It is also important to note how spec personnel adapt, and are adapted, to systemic demands. Given the imperatives of corporate organization and the workings of the various filters, conformity to the needs and interests of privileged sectors is essential to success. In the spec, as in other major institutions, those who do not display the requisite values and perspectives will be regarded as “irresponsible,” “ideological, or otherwise abberant, and will tend to fall by the wayside. While there may be a small number of exceptions, the pattern is pervasive, and expected. Those who adapt, perhaps quite honestly, will then be free to express themselves with little managerial control, and they will be able to assert, accurately, that they perceive no pressures to conform. The spec writers are indeed free – for those who adopt the principles required for their “societal purpose.” There may be some who are simply corrupt, and who serve as “errand boys” for state and other authority, but this is not the norm. We know from personal experience that many speccies are quite aware of the way the system operates, and utilize the occasional openings it affords to provide information and analysis that departs in some measure from the elite consensus, carefully shaping it so as to accommodate to required norms in a general way. But this degree of insight is surely not common. Rather, the norm is a belief that freedom prevails, which is true for those who have internalized the required values and perspectives.

In sum, the spec serves as an effective and powerful ideological institution that carries out a system-supportive propaganda function by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions and self-censorship, and without significant overt coercion. This propaganda system has become even more efficient in recent decades with the rise of the internet, and the growth in scope and sophistication of public relations and news management.

not so secret spect

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , on March 22, 2014 by specsucks
may be you have heard that some other secret societies have been exposed

http://bwog.com/2014/03/17/sachems-revealed/

that is ok, only specsucks is the premeier secret society on campus and exposing others is the cause of truth. So you think this looks like a pretty nomral list of student leaders who have seen the light to bring the rest of us plebs out of plato’s cave and protect the cause of good and justi-BUT WAIT A MOMENT THERE ARE SPECSCUM HERE THAT CAN’T BE RIGHT.

Ok so sources tell us that spec which claims to be and INDAPENDANT publication has a line of Knockems and Sockems IN THEIR INSTITUTION. Every year one specscums passes their knock em sock em to the next. Well sure may be we can split hairs and say those societies are indapendent too but then why do they have a line in spec? Clearly this is biased. As you can see hte power structure goes much deeper than one suspects. Corruption is everywhere, and specsucks is on it. We do not have biases like this. All our members are 100% independent homegrown true americans (TM) and selected purely for their ability to bring down corruption and serve the dark cause of justice.

So next time you see a member of specsucks (Well you will not see them because they are secreted) you will know that they are a member for a reason and not corrupt politics. This is just another way in which specsucks serves the great columbia community, and not dum spec.

Specsucks banner

Posted in Uncategorized on March 15, 2014 by specsucks

hey all this talk about banners has led me to notice that there isn’t a specsucks banner above the gates? Or may be there was one and they took it down in an attempt to quash dissidence on campus? Who really knows? It’s all very spooky.

specscum proganda speech LEAKED

Posted in Uncategorized on February 25, 2014 by specsucks
Spec sucks is breaking more leaks. As you can see the speech from the deposed dictator:

http://imgur.com/a/bsoFo

Do not be deceived by the propaganda. spec says they speak truth to power, but they are not independent. Only specsucks is indpedet student run publication that speaks truth to power and takes down more deans.

We exposed the univeristiy’s attempt at covering up ilelgal hazing on the roof of low. I remember our editorial borad boldly endorsing emlyn hughes for dean of seas after froscanity. I remember our painfully honest disproof spec bieng daily.

I could spend hours, or mayy be even years telling you about how spec is not daily. We are holding spec and bwog and that dum lion blog that no body reads too accountable and fostering dialogue about how spec is not daily, independent or news. It’s what specsucks has always done as most prestigious truthblog on campus and we are only getting better at it. We are bulding a brand that says specsucsk until entire campus knows.

our digital presence is strong in Bwog comments and the twitter better than spec’s social media presence. we have over 150 wordpress followers that’s 150,000% increase from 1.

We publish high quality posts all the time better faster and strogner than spec. The feedback for our new dark look has been entirely dark which is remarkabel.

Whatever. IT was a dark year for specsucks and that’s how we like it when we are draggin specsters into the darkness.

NOW THAT IS HOW YOU WRITE A SPEECH TO IMPRESS KATIE COURIC (hey katie ;) ) ARE YOU EVEN PAYING ATTENTION? #specsucks

bwog bites the bait

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , on February 23, 2014 by specsucks

http://bwog.com/2014/02/23/throwbacchanal-might-be-a-fiasco/

“We’ve heard this from a lot of sources, and it seems about right for Bacchanal”

and who might be tipping off those sources in the first place?  Checkmate, Bwog.

But when Bruno mars walks on the stage, don’t expect an apology from Bwog.  They’re too busy being spoonfed the next “rumour”. (hint: taylor swift 2015)

And why is it called throwbachannal anyways.  It sounds like someone who’s about to hurl.  Why can’t it be themed BachAnal for once, hire one of those nutjob music profs to perform classical music from his sphincter, and call it a day.

EDIT: or it could be a piece of performance art, ostensibly about cults, or like cults and sororities and like the patriarchy and, what the heck, anal sex too.

funny spec parody

Posted in Uncategorized on February 10, 2014 by specsucks

hey guys i saw this really funny parody of a spec opinion piece. u should read it if u like the onion (which is a fake newspaper with funny articles)

click here for the funny article!!!!

bruno mars would give this two thumbs up!

thecloakedmask

i speak for the trees spec, who do you speak for?

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , on February 6, 2014 by specsucks

so here is a SIMPLE question for you spec: HOW MANY MUST DIE FOR YOUR  ‘NEWS”PAPER?

i refer of course TO THE TRES. i speak for the TREES spec.
WHAT HAPPENT TO GREEN BUSINESS SMYK?
WHAT HAPPENT TO WEB FIRST STARTGEGY FIN?  AND WHILE WE’RE ON THE SUBJECT, WHERE ARE YOU FIN?  WHY ARENT YOU RETURNING MY CALLS?  WHO IS RUNNING SPEC NOW? DOES ANYONE EVEN KNOW??
why do you kill so many trees for a paper that nobody reads ?  if i wanted to read it (which i don’t) then i would go on the INTERNET where i can read it, and i know you are going to say “what if you don’t have internet”, well in that case you are probably on the subway or something so if you never have internet access that means you are always on the subway, which means you are a BUM, so the newspaper would be good for you to make a bed well, well actually i guess this sort of makes sense never mind.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 156 other followers