Daily Princetonian parodies Asians

Juliana Kiyan Senior Editor

Shortly after Princeton University’s student newspaper ran its annual joke issue on Jan. 17, readers responded with outrage to an op-ed column that they claimed constituted anti-Asian bigotry. The Daily Princetonian column, written in broken English, parodied an Asian American student who filed a civil rights complaint against Princeton.

The ensuing debate over the column has raised a complicated question about broader issues of race, fairness, and diversity at elite universities: Do Asian Americans face discrimination in the admissions process?

The Princetonian column was written from the perspective of “Lian Ji,” a pseudonym for now-Yale freshman Jian Li. Like thousands of high school seniors, Li applied for a spot in Princeton’s class of 2010 and, like most, he was denied admission. His subsequent lawsuit alleged that the University’s admission office discriminates against Asian applicants. He also stated that preferences for legacy status and recruited athletes create biases in the admissions process and can put qualified Asian American applicants at a disadvantage.

Regarding Li’s lawsuit, Vassar Dean of Admissions David Borus said, “I’m no lawyer, but it’s quite likely the suit won’t go anywhere. Simply because a student has high SAT scores does not mean he’s guaranteed a spot in a highly competitive university like Princeton. They look at a great many factors like academics, personal background and statement, extracurricular activities. It will be difficult to prove claims of bias against an ethnicity.”

The Princetonian column begins, “Hi Princeton! Remember me? I so good at math and science. Perfect 2400 SAT score. Ring bells? Just in cases, let me refresh your memories. I the super smart Asian. Princeton the super dumb college, not accept me. I get angry and file a federal civil rights complaint against Princeton for rejecting my application for admission.” It later said: “Yellow people make the world go round. We cook greasy food, wash your clothes and let you copy our homework.”

In response to readers’ outcry, the Princetonian published an editors’ note expressing regret for upsetting readers. The column’s authors, said to include “several Asians on senior editorial staff,” claimed they had “embraced racist language in order to strangle it.” The note rejected the allegation of racism and hoped the column would spark dialogue on ethnicity and the admissions process.

However, students, alumni, and faculty at Princeton and other colleges remained unconvinced. In a letter to the editor Princeton Class of ’89 member Dale Ho wrote, “There is real anger and disappointment out there over this, and you should consider trying to understand where that comes from rather than simply writing off your critics as not getting the joke.” Others have brushed it off for its “stupidity” or supported the editorial board altogether. Sahil Mahtani, a columnist for Harvard University’s The Harvard Crimson, instead targeted Li. “It was not the Daily Princetonian which turned an everyday admissions issue into a racial issue,” wrote Mahtani. “Rather, it was Jian Li who did that.”

Considering the range of reactions, the column reignited the issue over which Li originally sued Princeton. His lawsuit cited a Princeton study that appeared in Social Science Quarterly and examined the qualifications and admission rates of 45,000 students who applied to three top universities. To support his claims, Li focused on the study’s finding that Asian American students faced the lowest admissions rates of any ethnic group (17.6 percent, compared with 23.8 percent for whites, 33.7 percent for blacks, and 26.8 percent for Hispanics). If preferences based on race, legacy, and athleticism were all removed, Asian American enrollment would jump 40 percent, while white enrollment would drop by one percent.

At Vassar, though, the issue is a bit different. “Vassar, unlike some of the larger institutions, does include Asian American students among students of color we are looking to actively recruit,” said Borus. “That is not always the case at other universities, where…they do not consider Asian Americans at those campuses to be underrepresented.” He added, “It is important to note that we don’t have any quotas or present targets or limits on students from any background.” About 12.24 percent of the Class of 2010 self-identified as Asian. “You can debate whether that number is high, low, or in-between,” said Borus. “Our overall goal in bringing in students is to choose the most academically notable, most diverse, most talented, interesting group of students each year.”

Asked if the column might have any impact on applications to the University next year, Borus replied, “It’s a regrettable incident, but they’ll move on. Schools like Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and a few others are immune to these sorts of things.”