Tell Mahoney and the other pompous jerks that if you want to not use shorthand to not use both. If comparing University of Pennsylvania, then use The Pennsylvania State University.
How about not acting like a victim?

The only way for us to stop needing to say ‘Not Penn State’ if for us to start saying ‘Not Penn’.

ie, the University of Pennsylvania needs to change its name in order to get a distinct identity!!

Excellent, Liz, your timeline that is! Only things I missed were 1) After the bit about the four year affair with victime 1 you say (citing from memory), “Investigation begun after an anonymous individual reports being touched inappropriately over a four-year span.” Is this anonymous individual in fact victim 1, who was involved with Sandusky from 2005-2008? 2) At the 2010 spot you could have rementioned the graduate assistant’s testimony to the grand jury in December. One sort of wonders why his action in reporting what he saw to his superior is so commendable, while Paterno’s same act caused his firing. Is it because they were at the opposite ends of the career spectrum? That Paterno was expected to know the character of a long-time assistant without being alerted to one instance of chronic behavior?

To Noam Harel: There is no need for Penn to change its name. People who do not know the difference between Penn and Penn State are usually ignorant know-nothings. Now we know that even an ignorant know-nothing could be a New York Times columnist these days—a sad commentary how far a once great newspaper has fallen.

The nmost effective tool for me to screen out these know-nothings among strangest I meet is the Penn/Penn State test. It is a wonderfully effective tool. I highly recommend it!

Sorry for the bad typing—the last paragraph should have read “The most effective tool for me to screen out these know-nothings among the strangers I meet is the Penn/Penn State test…”

@bigkahuna –

With all due respect, the fact that we of the Penn community know the difference between Penn & Penn State is not the salient point. Name and brand recognition/projection is important and highly relevant to the non-Penn community.

While I agree the NYT is not what it used to be, it remains the US paper of record. Their failure to differentiate between Penn & Penn State reflects both their decline and our own failure at managing/projecting the Penn brand.

BTW – Recall that when Dau Jok committed to Penn, his local paper referred to it as Penn State. Brand management/projection is important.

The PSU trustees’ firing of a worthy and blameless president for a scandal involving a dangerous pedophile in the Athletic Department is the real story here. It appears to mean that Penn State and football are one and the same, which is very unfortunate. It’s a fine university.

To Ernie: While it may be true that the New York Times is regarded as the “US paper of record” along the Boston-Washington corridor, here in the West nobody gives a hoot about the New York Times. At any local Starbucks here, the New York Times is the paper nobody bothers to read, while there is always a long line for the Wall Street Journal and USA Today.

If the New York Times is supposed to be a premium East Coast paper, it is still a sad commentary how far it has fallen—not just the confusion about Penn and Penn State but also all the phony stories they published from the various “Pullitzer prize winning” (!) frauds.

@bigkahuna –

Accepting that everything you say in in your 2:15 post is correct – I don’t, but we can agree to disagree on some of it – that still leaves the issue of our responsibility for our own brand management. Dau Jok’s hometown paper is in Des Moines, Iowa, and they managed to get Penn & Penn State wrong.

Having read some of your posts I know you to be a sincerely ardent Penn sports fan. Don’t you think a school’s brand is an asset in recruiting athletes? If not, what’s your explanation for the loss of so many BB recruits last year to Harvard?

The most common argument against changing Penn’s name is the whole ‘Anybody who doesn’t know the difference doesn’t matter anyway’ line of attack. But this is just a way to try to make ourselves feel less annoyed every time it happens – and it will continue to happen unless we change our name and brand.

Please join me in signing this petition to at least get a more serious discourse going in the Penn community: http://www.change.org/petitions/university-of-pennsylvania-board-of-trustees-stop-saying-not-penn-state-say-not-penn

To Ernie: While I fully understand where you are coming from, and I wholeheartedly agree that there is much to be done (and improved!) regarding Penn’s brand management, I stick to my view that brand management is about managing your appeal to your constituency. Quite frankly, I don’t see the “ignorant know nothings” as members of the Penn constituencies—either as students or fans. Thank goodness I don’t see any of them at my beloved Franklin Field!

Harvard beats out most schools (including virtually all Ivy competitiors) because of Harvard’s unsurpassed brand and also its enormous financial aid budget. Harvard’s official financial aid guideline is much superior to Penn’s official financial aid guideline. Unless Penn is willing and able to match Harvard toe-to-toe on every case, we are likely to lose recruitng battles to them more often than not. This is more of a money issue than a brand issue…

To Noam: My reasoning of people who don’t know the difference don’t matter anyway is not my way of being less annoyed. As I get older (I am much older than you), I value my time more and is less willing to waste my time with “people who don’t matter”. I may sound arrogant or hard-hearted to some but it is great way for me to use my time more efficiently.

@Noam Harel ’92 – I am sympathetic to your logic, but the solution for brand management is not as simple as name change. An avid grad told me at the Columbia FB game that he bristles at the mention of “UPenn” for example. I don’t have a magic bullet for this, other than to know brand management must be addressed, rather to simply assume it will take care of itself.

@bigkahuna – Glad to see we agree on some things. Let’s use your logic that brand is primarily to “…manage your appeal to your constituency.” Surely you don’t mean by ‘your constituency’ as limited to undergrads, alums, faculty and the campus community?

If you are including potential students/athletes/faculty et al, then they can’t be defined as part of your constituency until they officially are. One implication of your logic is that anyone not part of our constituency, and who doesn’t know the brand, is not worth having. That would certainly shrink Penn’s market appeal.

Another question from your “…Thank goodness I don’t see any of them (ignorant know nothings) at my beloved Franklin Field” – permit me to say it’s also been my beloved Franklin Field. I lament that each year the seating is increasingly more exclusive (read lower attendance).

While it’s true we may have had 17,000 at last week’s homecoming, it pales when compared to 65,000 & 35,000 not including tailgates attendance at the H-Y game. That’s not a function of money but brand power. BTW – I accept the unlevel Ivy playing field vis financial resources, but that doesn’t begin to address recruiting issues.

Hello Ernie: My definition of the Penn constiuency is not just the current Penn campus community. My point is that from a market positioning perspective, Penn is a Tiffany. When you are a Tiffany, your constituency (current customers and future customers you hope to secure) are not the same crowd as the “Nickel and Dime Store” constituency. That is all I am saying.

When I go to Franklin Field (or even Princeton Stadium), I feel safe. I cannot say the same when I go to Candlestick in San Francisco, the Oakland Coliseum or the L.A. Coliseum. I am sure the elements at those venues that make me feel unsafe are not natural members of the Penn constituency. if other schools like Miami, USC, and Penn State are OK with those types, they can have them. Penn should be competing on higher grounds.

The article regarding the confusion of two institutions seems irrelevant. As Gelles pointed out, the crime is not a “Penn State” problem, but a problem which can arise in any university. Penn State is a great institution, regardless of the allegations against Sandusky. As a graduate of Penn State in ’99 and a current grad student at Wharton, I cannot imagine how anyone can get the two mixed up.

This is about crimes enabled by an entire institution. Of course this can and probably already happened at Penn. This is just another secretive place where pr reigns. The conditions are in place here for all kinds of abuse to take hold. Sick deviants are allowed to run schools like Penn and people are worried about a name confusion.

To Mac: Do you have any evidence to support your claim that “Of course this can and probably already happened at Penn”?

If this is what Penn is, can I order a Not Penn shirt?

I am truly ashamed at the message of this article. Is the most significant topic of discussion that can come from this atrocity- the one that makes the front page and is the only mention of it at all in this issue- really the effect it has on Penn’s reputation? I find it appalling that instead of being disgusted by the horrible actions of this man (and the other men involved in keeping it secret) all the DP and the community that it purports to represent can do is complain about how it tarnishes their image. The thing that I find so ridiculous about this is that no wonder people mistake us with Penn State, because instead of establishing our own identity, all we do is cry about how we are not them. Why don’t we stand up and take the essential issue here to heart- make it relevant to our community. This means demanding to know how sexual, and other forms of abuse, occur on our campus, continue to stay under the radar, and go unhindered. How can we learn from the mistakes of others?

I hope that other Penn students see the ridiculousness of this article and react to it too. If we don’t then we really need to get our heads out of our own you-know-whats.

bigkahna:

On February 21, 2003 Judith Rodin wrote a letter to a 23 year old woman rejecting the charge that a former professor, Tracy McIntosh, had raped the 23 year old.

That letter reflected the conclusion of a bogus and incompentent investigation, most probably designed to protect McIntosh.

Such investigations ARE the norm at Penn.

We know about that McIntosh investigation because of information found in a March 13, 2005 Inquirer. I will send that piece to anyone who asks: smaczko@verizon.net.

The most problematic thing about the story of Judith Rodin’s letter, however, is that, to the very best of my knowledge, it has never been mentioned by the DP.

As far as the silliness of this article is concerned, you should judge it in light of this fact: on October 5 of this year I sent a copy of the Inquirer article to the current Executive Editor.

Take the current article as an indication that the DP is not able to rise above its traditional role as the fool of Penn administrators.

LL Splash, I couldn’t agree with you more. Reputation seems to play an important role in the fabric of the University of Pennsylvania. We have an obligation to learn from what we see, report the news from a perpesctive of a student, not just a “Penn” student. Unfortunately, these principles is a far cry from the elitist mentality that some of my classmates prefer.

It’s time to make name confusion work FOR us instead of against us.

I suggest that we change our name to either Harvert or Princedon.

@Bravado & LL Splash – No argument the fundamental issue is the victims. But little I or other posters have to contribute would be anything more than piling on.

3-part question for you and others readers, including bigkahuna: 1) If this horrific incident had happened at another state school without a legendary coach (Oklahoma State, Michigan State etc. – selected purely at random, I promise) would the NYT have made it more than a 1 or 2 day story? 2) Absent the NYT daily P1 coverage, would the story have remained so publicly visible? 3) If it wasn’t Penn State/Penn, would it have remained a multi-day lead DP story? I honestly don’t don’t know.

@Steve Maczko: “…the DP is not able to rise above its traditional role as the fool of Penn administrators.” Sadly, it’s been a long time since the DP practiced speaking truth to power, as they used to. Without their contribution, horrific stories like the one you related will continue on campus.

Meanwhile, other than write opinion pieces, or link with stories in other publications, the DP will continue to believe they are producing a newspaper, and we readers will continue to pretend we are reading one.

To Ernie: Speaking only for myself: I became aware of the Penn State scandal on Saturday morning while I logged onto ESPN.com to look up football scores. I would not have paid any attention to the story except that the AD and VP of Penn State were charged with perjury (usually it would be players), and that tipped me off there must a big story developing. That said, I did not pay attention to the Penn State scandals per se except the various ESPN chanels on my cable kept reporting it during the weekend.

As you might surmise, I do not have a subscription to the New York Times nor would I hunt for a copy of it. (Like many people in this itnernet age, I no longer maintain print subscriptions to any newspapers). Philly.com had numerous articles on the Penn State scandals and lots of “Pennsylvania perspectives” of what it all meant, and how awful it is.