This is a ridiculous editorial! As a student I think this will be a great resource and from everything I have heard from my friends at Stanford, a school which already has ItunesU, it is great and hugely popular. Maybe the DP should do some research before writing whiney editorials.

The DP consistently outdoes itself in producing one of the worst papers known to man. And this editorial is just another demonstration of the complete lack of journalistic integrity that defines the paper. I have to wonder why this editor wanted to go into journalism in the first place: was it to accurately report the news for the betterment of those around him or simply to see his own name in print? Regardless, this editor clearly wasted no time doing research before submitting this brain-vomit to be published: members of the UA are already working with administrators to improve Penn InTouch as well as Penn Transit Service. Additionally, UA members are helping negotiate a new contract with MacGray Laundry Services, which will take into account studentsÃ? concerns and include significant improvements to laundering experience of the student body. iTunesU and the other projects above are only a few of the many projects that the UA is currently working on, which include everything from repairing the high-rise elevators to renovations for low-rises to recycling options for students living off-campus. The members of the UA are capable of focusing on more than one issue at a time. In addition, they are capable of preparing well-researched documents that result in real improvements for undergraduates -- can the DP say the same?

The next time you write an editorial, make sure you actually read the proposal. I am shocked at how negligent the editorial board has been about this. iTunesU is NOT a UA initiative. This is 100% a decision made by the adminstration, and will be implemented with or without UA backing. All the UA proposal does is endorse the implementation, and calls for the UA working with professors and departments to build support for this and ensure that this will be a success.

Wow, if it is true that the UA is working on all of those items, than the DP is even more oblivious that I had thought. The editors should be ashamed of writing such a misleading editorial just for the sake of having some negative news to print. give me a break! Penn students deserve better! [QUOTE id="9f130292-9324-487a-befe-6505297b87b5"]The DP consistently outdoes itself in producing one of the worst papers known to man. And this editorial is just another demonstration of the complete lack of journalistic integrity that defines the paper. I have to wonder why this editor wanted to go into journalism in the first place: was it to accurately report the news for the betterment of those around him or simply to see his own name in print? Regardless, this editor clearly wasted no time doing research before submitting this brain-vomit to be published: members of the UA are already working with administrators to improve Penn InTouch as well as Penn Transit Service. Additionally, UA members are helping negotiate a new contract with MacGray Laundry Services, which will take into account studentsÃ? concerns and include significant improvements to laundering experience of the student body. iTunesU and the other projects above are only a few of the many projects that the UA is currently working on, which include everything from repairing the high-rise elevators to renovations for low-rises to recycling options for students living off-campus. The members of the UA are capable of focusing on more than one issue at a time. In addition, they are capable of preparing well-researched documents that result in real improvements for undergraduates -- can the DP say the same?[/QUOTE]

WHO CHECKS THE DP'S SOURCES??? THIS ARTICLE'S INFORMATION IS COMPLETELY WRONG! I'm tired of constantly reading editorials with absolutely made up information in them. This editorial is a disgrace to the student government at Penn, who does nothing but work tirelessly to improve student life. Get you facts straight!

The DP is wrong again. The UA is simply backing an initiative of the administration, they did not bring this on as "their latest project" but are working to make it the best it can be since it will happen with or without the UA's support. GET YOUR SOURCES RIGHT DP. STOP WRITING RIDICULOUS ARTICLES.

While I don't agree completely with the viewpoint of the editorial, I am astounded to read the tremendous uproar over this article. The main point of this article is that 1) iTunes doesn't necessarily match what students want and can have negative ramifications 2) the UA should focus on more important issues. The first argument is a simple opinion that is based on a simple observation - the UA didn't really make an effort to poll the students. The second argument I believe actually holds a lot of merit. Granted, the UA CAN focus on a lot of things after all. According to the mid-year report, theare are...30+ initiatives? going on right now? Yet, what I've observed all through my time here is that because the UA has its hands full, a lot of effort is put into small helpful but relatively unimportant measures and SUBSTANTIAL measures are much rarer. Lastly, the argument that the editor wanted to "simply to see his own name in print"? There is no name with this article. If you've really taken the time to compare college newspapers, the DP is truly one of the nation's best. I am a bit unnerved by the ...aversion..the DP seems to have toward Penn at times, but the journalistic integrity of the newspaper is quite up there.

Thank you for your editorial, DP, but I would respectfully like to disagree with your misguided statements: "it is unclear how the technology will be installed or paid for" If you go on the UA's website (dolphin.upenn.edu/~ua) you will find that it is a Plan of Action, and they are working closely with Penn Computing and ISC to implement what they have planned to look into. Your statement seems unfounded and misguided when looking at the body of their actual work. "The UA went ahead with this proposal without any formal request from the student body and without any student feedback." Again, as this was a Plan of Action, to bombard the Student Body with e-mails and surveys about something that they are going to be working on would be radically inefficient. It's easy to blast the UA from your high horse, DP, but they seem to also respect students' e-mail inboxes until it is actually necessary. As evident from two of their most prominent projects, Ruckus and the Busses to the Airport, extensive surveys and research accompany any project that a UA proposal fully endorses. This illuminates that the DP did not fully research and reach out to students who know the process of these sorts of projects, and leads me to question the trustworthyness of any stated 'facts' from the editorial board. "The UA is charged with the task of representing student interests and needs." Wait a minute...you just criticized the UA for not asking students, but then claim that they are charged to represent their behalf. So you're saying they can only represent students when it aligns with the sentiments of the DP editorial staff? It ridiculous to contradict yourself, at once claiming that the UA cannot possibly represent students on its own and in the same document assert that they are charged to represent students. Not only are your facts wrong and research lacking, you lack the logic to remain consistant! "And as long as students are complaining about laundry machines, bus services and Penn InTouch, to name a few, that's where the UA's energy should remain focused." In fact, only two members of the UA are working on said project, if you researched that fact (unlikely). That means there are 31 other members of the UA who work on your projects of demonstrated concern: laundry, bus services, and Penn InTouch. Laundry services has already had a plan of action come out this year and UA members working out of the facilities committee are meeting with Business Services and the service we contract our laundry to to brainstorm where laundry services need more help: new machines, more dryers than washers so more people can wash and dry at once, an integrated system so you can check if laundry machines are in use online, etc. Bus services are also being looked into as the facilities committee is also in constant communication with the Penn Transit (they did, after all, get busses to the airport). PennInTouch is a prominent project that the Education committee is working on, and aside from the estimated $4-5 million it would cost to revamp the system entirely, the committee is working to get students to develop a website that would be ancillary to penn in touch but would make registering for classes easier with the online resource. I have no doubt that those of you who write for the DP put a lot of time, energy and research into your articles. Most of the time, I am quite impressed with the paper you are able to put out every day. But your utter lack of dilligence, research, and logic in this scathing criticism of working on providing the student body with a service that many would probably use and benefit from seems strange. I implore you to be more responsible in your writing so we can take you more seriously in the future.

I think that this article is an outrage. There was no research done concerning this topic nor anything else the UA has done or plans to do this year. I have serious doubts that the writer of this article has read the proposal or Mid-year report by the UA and is simply listing off his/her opinions with no backing. When reporting the news, especially concerning things that the UA is doing that directly affects students on campus, report the news. Base it on fact and not your lofty ideals or opinions. This is seriously an outrage.

Maybe if the Executive Editor of the paper had any journalistic experience to speak of an editorial such as this one wouldn't get printed. Let's see how Shawn's business savvy can get him out of this debacle.

It would be nice if UA members and their friends would stop blatantly filling up the comments page with their hyperventilating. So many "concerned students"!

You know what else would be nice? If the DP would report the facts in the first place, so that "UA members and their friends" wouldn't have to come online and set the record straight. I'm glad that there are so many "concerned students" who actually care enough about the student body to spend hours every week working for us. How long did the iTunes article take this editor? Clearly no time wasted on research, so I'd guess about 15 minutes to write it up + the 10 minutes to walk to the DP office. Great commitment to the students you serve.

As opposed to the UA, which does...well...ummm. There are obviously people in the UA trying to do something. But like most student organizations, it's mainly filled with people trying to pad their resumes.

I think that this iTunes U is a good idea. Before we write it off, I think we should try it out. I have faith in the UA, because they are representing our interests. They are students afterall. So before we bash this idea, I think we should give it a go, and if in the end this fails, well then, hey, at least we gave it a try.

iTunes? Why don't we get students to read real books first.

Dear UA, Don't you have bigger fish to fry? Stop playing kiddie Congress and passing resolutions on iTunes lectures and then trolling around the DP forum when you are criticized.

I think it is ridiculous of you to suggest that any student who cares enough to properly take issue with the DP, is a UA member or one of their friends. The UA has actually done a few things that have truly benefited students and the DP should stop complaining and rather recognize that there is a group of students who care enough to spend their time trying to improve student life at Penn.

I have to agree. nuff said.