Students vote to remove CollegeACB from campus
Most students choose to abstain from vote
Students voted on a referendum this week in favor of banning CollegeACB. The Undergraduate Student Government will respond to the referendum by asking the administration and technology services to block the Web site from the Tulane network.
Below the option to vote for USG senators, students had the option to answer whether they supported the referendum. Of the respondents, 568 voted in favor, 394 opposed and 598 abstained.
Though USG intervened when Juicy Campus was popular, it did not ask for removal of the Web site from Tulane’s network. This time, however, USG will ask the administration to block CollegeACB.
“We’re asking the administration to ban access to that Web site, which I have had mixed feelings about for a very long time,” USG president Lauren Aronson said. “But that doesn’t mean I don’t think it will be an added benefit to our school.”
USG Senator Ashley Hollier said that the number of abstentions, which exceeded the number of votes in favor of the ban, might have resulted from poor publicity. She also said the wording of the question may have been unclear.
“I don’t think we did the best job of publicizing it before and informing the students what they were voting for,” Hollier said. “That’s something we could have done better as USG.”
Several campus organizations supported the ban, including Panhellenic council, Interfraternity Council, Hillel, Chabad and Newcomb Senate, Hollier said.
“The reason we did this is because we wanted to see how students and organizations felt before a couple of us asked the university or did something like that,” Hollier said.
Aronson said she is concerned about the fact that students can access the Web site through other means. She said Tulane and organizations supporting the ban should promote a culture in which students do not feel compelled to visit these Web sites.
“All censorship issues aside, I consider us all to be mature adults who wouldn’t feel the need to go on one of those Web sites,” Aronson said.
Hollier said some organizations are in fact promoting a different campus culture in addition to supporting the ban.
“USG has taken the initiative to start a letter-writing campaign to the advertisers on the site and a public-service style approach of giving facts about the results and the repercussions of online bullying and online harassment,” Hollier said. “And [we may] possibly be bringing in some kind of programming like a speaker about the danger of online bullying and harassment.”
Sophomore Gabby Alessi-Friedlander said she forgot to vote and wished the proposal has been better publicized.
“The only reason I knew [about the referendum] was because someone who was on USG told me about it,” she said.
Alessi-Friedlander said that she supported the proposed ban on the Web site.
“I’m not looking at it from a constitutional point of view,” Alessi-Friedlander said. “It’s just so offensive, so racist, so superficial and anti-Semitic, so it never crossed my mind in that way.”
Sophomore Matthew Irimpen said that he abstained from voting because he did not understand what the question was asking. He said, however, that he does not support the ban.
“They should not ban it because it’s a way for kids to keep themselves entertained, like Facebook or Twitter.”