Personal Attack by Conley a "Grave Misuse"

I am writing in response to Sebastian Conley's cartoon--yes, cartoons--of April 9, 1993. While I normally appreciate Conley's daring lampoons of everything from Harvard life to the Clinton Administration, I found his personal attack on "Natasha" to be a grave misuse of your newspaper. Even the cartoon page should not serve as a pulpit for the sort of childish vituperation perpetrated by Conley.

Now we would normally dismiss Conley's actions as appropriate to his age. After all, it is probably unreasonable to expect mature judgement from someone so new to the "real world." Yet, when an individual is given the voice and the concomitant power afforded any individual who publishes in a widely circulated paper, our expectations must rise to a commensurate level. No longer can a spiteful young man rail against his enemies with impunity--as he might do in the Harvard Union.

Nor can we excuse the Crimson editors for allowing the piece to be printed. There is, in fact, no excuse short of acute lack of professionalism for allowing this brat to hector unchecked.

Does Conley realize just how injurious his actions were? Undoubtedly he intended some harm. But does he realize what a published character assassination--erroneously alleged, no less--can do to the assassinated? If he does not, let me say this: it is out of all proportion with anything even an evil person might intend. Having your personal life--let alone an inaccurate portrayal of your personal life--publicized against your wishes is a humiliation no one deserves (save, at this point, Conley). I hope Conley will keep this in mind the next time someone rubs his tender side the wrong way. Jeremy L. Wallison '95