Opinion

JENNIFER CALFAS

EDITOR IN CHIEF

AARICA MARSH 

and DEREK WOLFE 

EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LEV FACHER

MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at 

the University of Michigan since 1890.

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s editorial board. 

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Monday, October 5, 2015

Why I don’t read the news

WANT TO JOIN THE OPINION SECTION?

Check out The Michigan Daily’s editorial board meetings. Every Monday and 

Wednesday at 6 p.m., the Daily’s opinion staff meets to discuss both 

University and national affairs, and write editorials. 

E-mail tothedaily@michigandaily.com to join in the debate. 

J

unior year of high school, I 
took up a simple but effec-
tive habit. Accompanied 

by my morning 
coffee, I would 
open a collec-
tion of five tabs 
labeled 
“news” 

on my internet 
browser. 
After 

about an hour 
of 
browsing 

Reuters, 
BBC 

and other media 
outlets, I had a 
nice 
introduc-

tion to the day’s 
major stories.

For a while, my newfound practice 

was sustained by the many advan-
tages it offered. I loved finishing my 
friends’ sentences when they enthu-
siastically began, “Did you hear 
about …?” Breaking news headlines 
rarely surprised me; I had already 
read about them hours before. Most 
of all, I learned an incredible amount. 
Each article led to a frenzy of Wiki-
pedia pages as I tried to decipher the 
complicated backstories needed to 
understand them.

But these perks soon reached a 

point of diminishing returns. I grew 
exhausted of my morning routine, 
despite an abundance of exciting 
current events. Did it simply lose 
its novelty over time? No, there was 
something more meaningful at play.

I had learned a valuable lesson: The 

news is overrated.

Let’s overlook, for a moment, the 

irony of this criticism appearing in a 
newspaper. I’m actually in very good 
company. Nearly 150 years before the 
24-hour news cycle, Henry David 
Thoreau insisted: “I am sure that I 
never read any memorable news in 
a newspaper. If we read of one man 

robbed, or murdered, or killed by 
accident, or one house burned, or 
one vessel wrecked … we need never 
read of another.” What was true in an 
age of typewriters is doubly true in 
an age of smartphones, where tech-
nology has ushered in an explosion 
 

of information.

This abundance is not as useful 

as it may seem. We are not unbiased 
readers, rationally swayed by current 
events. We consume the news through 
the lens of our social and political 
beliefs. Because of this, we tend to 
read what we want to read. If some-
thing conflicts with our worldview, we 
are more than happy to blame journal-
istic bias or misreporting. As a result, 
the news is more a source of validation 
than it is knowledge.

Moreover, the news tends to be 

tragic by its very nature. You’ll read a 
story about a new anti-cancer therapy 
one day, but never hear about it again. 
On the contrary, 
tragedies 
bring 

with them dozens 
of 
corroborating 

stories: “Who’s to 
blame? 
Update: 

casualty 
count 

rises. Could this 
happen 
to 
us? 

Casualty 
count 

rises again.” This 
is, no doubt, partly 
because 
major 

networks like to fulfill our morbid 
curiosities. But this curiosity comes 
at a heavy emotional price. Scroll-
ing through such heartbreaking sto-
ries is mentally taxing, and can be 
a huge source of anxiety for college 
students who have enough stress to 
 

begin with.

Finally, it’s important to under-

stand the news in its greater context. 
I again refer to Thoreau, finish-

ing his previous quote: “…If you are 
acquainted with the principle, what 
do you care for a myriad instances 
and applications?” He makes a valu-
able point here. Stories that we hear 
from around the world are merely 
symptoms 
of 
larger 
principles, 

whether they be social, geopolitical, 
etc. They reside on the surface; some-
one who is familiar with the deeper 
issues involved would, in theory, 
learn nothing new from them. Of 
course, the exception is game-chang-
ing events, which threaten to alter 
or even turn our principles on their 
heads. But the proportion of news 
stories that fall under this category 
is miniscule. Once you understand 
the principles, a staggering majority 
of current events become irrelevant.

What, then, is the alternative? My 

morning routine has since changed. 
I tend to read articles from analyti-
cal publications like the Brookings 

Institute 
and 

reputable think 
tanks. I find 
myself 
learn-

ing history in 
an attempt to 
explain 
the 

present. Like-
minded friends 
and 
I 
come 

together to dis-
cuss the news 
— rarely the 

stories themselves, but their global 
contexts. You might find your own 
alternatives. Whatever they are, 
they will be healthier — and more 
effective — than keeping up with the 
news religiously. Open your smart-
phone and you will find a sea of 
headlines. Take care not to drown.

— Farid Alsabeh can be reached 

at falsabeh@umich.edu.

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Ben Keller, Payton Luokkala, Aarica 

Marsh, Adam Morton, Victoria Noble, Anna Polumbo-Levy, 

Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Stephanie Trierweiler, 

Mary Kate Winn, Derek Wolfe

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

FARID
ALSABEH

I was disappointed to see several 

of my colleagues, under the pen 
name “Concerned Medical Students 
at the University of Michigan Medi-
cal School,” criticize the invita-
tion of Dr. Tom Price, a Republican 
member of the House of Represen-
tatives and alum of the University 
of Michigan Medical School, in an 
opinion piece published on Sept. 
24, before Price was scheduled to 
speak. Price spoke at the Medical 
School as part of the “Conversations 
with Leadership” series, where 
medical students are able to learn 
from notable Medical School alum-
ni who have become leaders in their 
fields. Because he is a congress-
man, chairman of the House Budget 
Committee and an alum, Price cer-
tainly qualifies. But my colleagues 
apparently disagree, not because of 
any lack in leadership credentials, 
but because they disagree with his 
political views.

In unintended irony, the authors 

largely criticize Price for “(main-
taining) partisan lines,” although 
these lines are, by definition, main-
tained by both political parties. 
They then criticize Price’s votes 
on various issues (unfairly para-
phrased by the authors), which 
were often in line with the over-
whelming majority in the House 
of Representatives. My colleagues 
state they were “not (rebuking) 
Price’s invitation to speak to our 
medical school,” but they question 
whether individuals like Price can 
be promoted as a “model of leader-
ship” given his conservative voting 
record, thereby tacitly implying 
that neither Price nor any other 
conservative should ever be invited 
as a speaker. Furthermore, and per-
haps more dangerously, the authors 
imply 
that 
conservative 
medi-

cal students are not qualified to 
serve as future physician-leaders, 
because conservatism is allegedly 

at odds with medical ethics. 

My colleagues insinuate that 

Price encourages violence against 
women because he voted against 
the deeply flawed Violence Against 
Women Act, that he supports gun 
violence because of his support for 
the Constitutional Concealed Carry 
Reciprocity Act, and that he seeks 
to deprive the poor of irreplaceable 
medical services by voting to trans-
fer the public funding of Planned 
Parenthood to other community 
health centers that provide vital 
services to poor women.

Many 
conservatives 
opposed 

the Violence Against Women Act 
because they believed the bill 
would have the unintended con-
sequence of increasing violence 
against women. A 2007 study from 
the National Bureau of Economic 
Research found that in states that 
implemented 
mandatory 
arrest 

laws, where police are required 
to arrest someone if they receive 
a domestic violence complaint, 
domestic violence homicides actu-
ally increased, possibly because 
abused women were more reluc-
tant to report domestic abuse out of 
the fear that their partners would 
 

be arrested.

The gun bill that my colleagues 

cite, the Constitutional Concealed 
Carry Reciprocity Act, does nothing 
to reduce the number of guns. Rath-
er, it seeks to apply a uniform stan-
dard of enforcement to a patchwork 
of state gun laws. It was proposed in 
response to cases like that of medi-
cal student Meredith Graves, who in 
2011 was arrested in New York City 
for self-reporting her concealed 
weapon (which was legal in her 
home state of Tennessee) to police 
when she learned that guns were 
prohibited at the 9/11 Memorial. At 
the time, she was charged with a 
felony that, if convicted, would have 
ruined her medical career. 

Many who watched the recent 

videos released by the Center for 
Medical 
Progress 
believe 
that 

Planned Parenthood was selling 
fetal tissue for profit (which would 
be a violation of federal law) since 
Planned 
Parenthood 
executives 

were shown apparently haggling 
over prices for fetal organs and jok-
ing about using money to buy luxu-
ry cars. For this reason, the House 
of Representatives voted to transfer 
the public funding of Planned Par-
enthood to other community health 
centers that provide vital services 
to women that Planned Parenthood 
does not provide directly, such 
 

as mammograms.

Certainly, my colleagues have the 

right to express displeasure with 
Price’s politics. The ability to freely 
express and challenge ideas is the 
cornerstone of an open educational 
environment and a free society. But 
to suggest that individuals are unfit 
for leadership, or even to speak and 
be heard, simply because they dis-
agree with one’s extremely parti-
san policy positions is antithetical 
to both free speech and the spirit of 
diversity at the University. A large 
part of being a successful physician 
is having the ability to work with 
patients who may have views and 
experiences very different from our 
own. I applaud the Medical School 
administration for inviting a strong 
conservative voice to our campus, 
allowing students to hear from 
distinguished individuals with dif-
ferent worldviews. I believe that 
interacting with individuals with 
whom we may disagree will make 
us all more thoughtful students and 
citizens. We should promote a cul-
ture where all students are heard 
and encouraged to become Ameri-
ca’s future leaders.

Benjamin Long is a 
 

second-year Medical student.

Conservatives should not be excluded 

from leadership

I grew exhausted of 
my morning routine, 
despite an abundance 

of exciting current 

events.

BENJAMIN LONG | VIEWPOINT

T

he annual Mud Bowl is a time-honored tradition valued by 
the University’s Greek life community. However, this year’s 
tournament is in peril after the Interfraternity Council 

threatened sanctions to any fraternity that participates, as doing so 
would violate a policy that prohibits IFC fraternities from participating 
in events with so-called “rogue fraternities.”

Sigma Alpha Epsilon — the host of the game 

for more than 80 years — is considered to 
be “rogue” after being de-recognized by the 
IFC four years ago and for having its charter 
revoked by its national organization over the 
summer for repeated unruly behavior, such as 
a stabbing at a Halloween party in 2013 and 
numerous other health and safety issues. Given 
this reputation, students should understand 
the risks of participating, but the recent 
decision by the Office of Greek Life and the 
IFC to effectively attempt to end the event is an 
overreach into private student affairs.

Now organizing under the “Flying Eagles,” 

the former members of SAE have planned for 
the charity event to continue, and it should. The 
Mud Bowl is a cornerstone of philanthropic 
events on this campus, having generated over 
$100,000 for C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital over 
the past five years alone. It would be a shame to 
lose that contribution.

It is beyond any doubt that the Mud Bowl 

has been, and always will be, associated with 
the University’s chapter of SAE — a new, avian-
inspired name can’t change that. However, if 
the members of the defunct chapter organize 
the event independently, then the tournament’s 
nominal and official connection to Greek life 
is broken. As long as there is absolutely no 
mention of the event using the name “SAE,” 
then there can be no official connection drawn 
by the Office of Greek Life and the IFC. If 
the participating teams, most likely other 
fraternities, also avoid participating under the 
names of their respective organizations, then 
the event effectively becomes one that isn’t 
part of Greek life at all. That should render 
any sanctions by the IFC ineffective, since it 

obviously has no jurisdiction over non-Greek 
groups. An attempt to overstep this jurisdiction 
to forestall the Mud Bowl is a clear violation of 
students’ individual rights, since the University 
has no control over the philanthropic events of 
private individual parties.

Beginning with the mass Greek life meeting 

in September, there has been a host of publicity 
devoted to the administration’s mission to tame 
troubling trends within Greek community, 
such as high rates of sexual assault and binge 
drinking. Therefore, it is concerning that of all 
things, the Mud Bowl — a relatively harmless, 
extensively planned charity event — would 
lead to the University’s first tangible action 
this semester against Greek life’s behavior.

This isn’t to say, though, the “Flying Eagles” 

can be lax regarding safety. Since this event 
will now be held with no University affiliation 
at all, it is imperative that the “Flying Eagles” 
be as transparent as possible when it comes to 
details and policies to ensure the community’s 
trust. Thus far they have been, having made 
clear that safety measures will be put in place, 
including a risk management policy, insurance 
and hired security.

Furthermore, the group occupying SAE’s 

former chapter house should consider opening 
the event to teams made up of non-Greek 
members. Not only would this potentially 
increase donations, but it would also help unite 
the student body around a football tournament 
that was previously reserved for one-fifth of 
the school. Ultimately, assuming the interest is 
there, it is events like these that can potentially 
start bridging the gap between the Greek and 
non-Greek communities. Efforts like that should 
be endorsed, not threatened by sanctions.

The Mud Bowl must go on

IFC participants should not face punishment

W

hen I arrived at the University 
three years ago, I planned to 
make the most of my college 

experience. Having grown 
up doing music and theatre 
my whole life, I decided 
to continue on this path 
by auditioning for seven 
a capella groups as well 
as the UM Educational 
Theatre Company. I knew 
these groups were competi-
tive, but I reasoned that if I 
auditioned for everything, 
I should at least get one 
callback 
for 
something. 

Instead, all eight groups 
flatly turned me down. As rejection e-mail after 
rejection e-mail flooded my inbox, I began to 
feel a mixture of disappointment, shame and 
inadequacy. To comfort myself, I watched Demi 
Lovato’s “Skyscraper” music video on loop 
while my roommate pretended not to notice the 
tears streaming down my face.

According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, 

feeling accepted is a key driving force behind 
human behavior. When we experience rejec-
tion, we feel anxious and unhappy because our 
sense of belonging has been jeopardized. Rejec-
tion can be so distressing that we stop putting 
ourselves out there so that we can avoid the 
pain of being repeatedly turned down.

After facing multiple rejections early in my 

college career, I lost all self-confidence and 
retreated back into my shell at a time when I 
should have been putting myself out there the 
most. I fell into a mentality of learned helpless-
ness. I passed up opportunities to apply to pro-
grams that interested me because I assumed I 
would never be chosen. It took until my junior 
year to find the courage to audition for another 
singing group; this time it was the Women’s 
Glee Club. I was completely shocked to receive 
an acceptance e-mail, and I immediately attrib-
uted my admittance to some sort of fluke in the 
audition process. It wasn’t until completing the 
first rehearsal that I realized I had earned a 
spot on my own merits.

As a current executive board member for the 

Women’s Glee Club, I am gaining a new perspec-
tive on rejection by learning about what goes on 
behind the scenes. Part of my job this semester 
was to help run auditions. My heart broke when 
we proofread the rejection e-mail aloud as an 
executive board. I thought back to all the fresh-
men I had met earlier that day, eager to become 
involved on campus and find a sense of commu-
nity. I pictured how their faces would fall as they 

read the e-mail, feeling the same disappointment 
I had felt during my own freshman year.

My biggest takeaway from running auditions 

was realizing how arbitrary the cutoffs were. The 
unfortunate reality is that there are always more 
talented, capable individuals interested in con-
tributing to any organization than there are open 
positions available. Rejection is never meant to 
be a malicious attack on someone’s character; 
it is merely an unavoidable byproduct of most 
application processes, especially at such a large, 
competitive university. Lines must be drawn 
somewhere, and often the only thing separat-
ing those who are rejected versus those who are 
accepted is luck. With this knowledge in mind, 
I am now able to face rejection without taking 
 

it personally.

Another way I learned to remedy the pain of 

rejection is through rejection therapy. A recent 
NPR piece interviewed Jason Comely, who was 
so afraid of rejection that he created a game to 
face his fear. Every day he completed a task that 
he knew would prompt a rejection, such as ask-
ing a stranger for a ride. By making rejection his 
goal, he became desensitized to the unpleas-
antness associated with being denied. He also 
found that he was rejected far less than he 
assumed, and instead began connecting with 
more people. He created playing cards listing 
various challenges, such as “Convince a strang-
er that you know them,” and “Before purchas-
ing something, ask for a discount.” His game 
became so popular that others began using his 
tactics to find dates.

This year, I am starting to practice my own 

form of rejection therapy. Every day I take at 
least one risk, whether it’s talking to a stranger, 
trying a new activity or applying to a new pro-
gram. Rather than feeling ashamed each time 
I am rejected, I am learning to laugh at myself 
and roll with whatever happens. Like Comely, 
I have been pleasantly surprised by how many 
times things have gone my way, allowing me 
to meet more people and take advantage of 
 

new opportunities.

I regret wasting my first three years at the 

University internalizing my rejection letters and 
letting them determine my decisions to apply to 
future programs. Now, as a senior, I realize that 
if I want something badly enough, I shouldn’t 
let one little “no” cause me to give up on myself. 
Instead, I will turn rejection into a laughing mat-
ter and keep pushing forward until I achieve my 
dreams. Go on and try to tear me down; I will be 
rising from the ground. Like a skyscraper.

— Annie Humphrey can be reached 

at annieah@umich.edu.

Taking rejection head-on

ANNIE
HUMPHREY

FROM THE DAILY