Letters to the editor

Reader responses to the fall 2015 Scope magazine included:

Naked partisanship. Behind its facade of Freudian psychobabble and generalizations about American society, Minita Sanghvi's Observation piece [page 2] is at root an endorsement of Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Since when does Scope open its columns to such naked partisanship? It is the near certainty that my grandchildren will encounter this sort of ideologically biased scholarship that is my greatest concern about their upcoming college experience. —Laurie Pfeffer Gershman '67, Rockville, Md.

Tangible vs. digital. I was disappointed to read of the discontinuation of Scope magazine. I very much enjoy receiving a printed copy of Scope and use my time with the issue to review the current affairs of the college, to learn what my fellow alumni are up to, to influence my giving, and most importantly to reflect on four very fond years at Skidmore.

While I appreciate the cost and environmental considerations, in an era of competing electronic distractions a well-produced, tangible publication is quite welcomed. An email just doesn't have the same effect. In a similar deliberation about the quarterly communications to the shareholders of a large family-owned business, we learned overwhelmingly of the preference for a physical newsletter. I believe the value of producing Scope is far greater than its financial cost and hope that Skidmore's administration will reconsider this decision. —Rob Condon '98, New York City

Comments about Scope are welcome here; letters may be edited for clarity and length.