Spring Break
EDITORIAL: Name-sharing policy just a headache
Forum | 9/5/06
Posted online at 1:46 AM EST on 9/5/06
We were not surprised to learn recently that the University provides personal information about undergraduates to companies like MBNA, which until last year was the world's largest credit-card provider. But we were disappointed to find out that students are given almost no choice in this matter.
As it stands, the University has the legal right to enter into contracts with businesses-the current list includes a vineyard and an insurance agency-to send their advertisements to students and alumni. In exchange for money, for example, the alumni association is able to send a letter soliciting students to sign up for MBNA credit cards. Although MBNA is never in possession of student information, the process is essentially a sale of a mass advertisement mailing-spam, tailored just for Brandeis.
College students and credit cards are old bedfellows, and we trust the bulk of our peers to use their plastic responsibly. But the casual brutality of credit-card companies-and their debt-collectors-is also well-known, and the University should be especially wary of exposing students to these types of companies.
What's worse are the methods by which the administration informs students about these practices, as well as the catch-22 of its "opt-out" process. Only by reading the fine print of the New Student Academic Information and Registration Handbook, which is plagued by legalese, can students learn about this process. To avoid receiving such solicitations, students must sacrifice their listings in the University directory-after doing so, the school cannot even confirm their existence.
That this practice seems so under-the-table is a quick tell: More than simply illustrating that the unattractiveness of this policy is almost certainly known to administrators, it is just ethically questionable to provide the personal information of students to businesses. And by attaching such harsh consequences to opting out-those who do will not receive information about senior pictures or buying caps and gowns-the University leaves students no choice: "Read our ads, or disappear."
Perhaps most astounding is the University's payoff: about $50,000 annually, not much more than a year's tuition.
While we wish the University would stop "spamming" students altogether, we hope the administration will at least inject some transparency into this process. In addition, students should be given a true option to opt-out-unlike the current system, which entails indirect penalties.
For while business is business, for $46,550 per year, we would hope the University could treat its students as more than names on a list.
As it stands, the University has the legal right to enter into contracts with businesses-the current list includes a vineyard and an insurance agency-to send their advertisements to students and alumni. In exchange for money, for example, the alumni association is able to send a letter soliciting students to sign up for MBNA credit cards. Although MBNA is never in possession of student information, the process is essentially a sale of a mass advertisement mailing-spam, tailored just for Brandeis.
College students and credit cards are old bedfellows, and we trust the bulk of our peers to use their plastic responsibly. But the casual brutality of credit-card companies-and their debt-collectors-is also well-known, and the University should be especially wary of exposing students to these types of companies.
What's worse are the methods by which the administration informs students about these practices, as well as the catch-22 of its "opt-out" process. Only by reading the fine print of the New Student Academic Information and Registration Handbook, which is plagued by legalese, can students learn about this process. To avoid receiving such solicitations, students must sacrifice their listings in the University directory-after doing so, the school cannot even confirm their existence.
That this practice seems so under-the-table is a quick tell: More than simply illustrating that the unattractiveness of this policy is almost certainly known to administrators, it is just ethically questionable to provide the personal information of students to businesses. And by attaching such harsh consequences to opting out-those who do will not receive information about senior pictures or buying caps and gowns-the University leaves students no choice: "Read our ads, or disappear."
Perhaps most astounding is the University's payoff: about $50,000 annually, not much more than a year's tuition.
While we wish the University would stop "spamming" students altogether, we hope the administration will at least inject some transparency into this process. In addition, students should be given a true option to opt-out-unlike the current system, which entails indirect penalties.
For while business is business, for $46,550 per year, we would hope the University could treat its students as more than names on a list.
Be the first to comment on this story