letters to the editor

Author: [no author name found]

To the Editor:

In response to Alex Garlick's piece criticizing Al Gore's award for the Nobel Peace Prize, I am curious as to why he chose not to criticize the 2004 award to Wangari Maathai, the Kenyan woman who won the award primarily for her environmental activism in Africa, and only secondarily for her overlapping mission to improve the lot of African women. While the author of the piece saw fit to draw attention to those who more obviously work for what is thought of as peace, i.e. non-war, he conveniently chose to exclude someone whose work deepens peace in an area that he apparently regards as already peaceful. The Nobel Peace Prize is designed to honor those who work for a better world, not just in areas of violent conflict. Honoring a man and a woman who are working to get people to change their lives to be more friendly to the planet that sustains us is certainly as worthy of that prize as someone who works to stop people from blowing each other up. Indeed, as Americans, we should be proud of the fact that one of our own has won the prize, and that six of the 12 Nobel Laureates this year were from our country. Repudiating one of our own for working to make the world a better place seems more than a little inappropriate.

Sincerely,

Jason Siegel '06
Bloomington, Ind.


To the Editor:

New Middlebury College Book Store Manager Bob Jansen has adopted trendy guerilla advertising methods to promote the store. These include a heightened presence on Internet-based networking sites and merchandise discounts to students who join an "Idea Group" or win contests. While these methods do indeed generate publicity and increase sales at the Book Store, Mr. Jansen seems to forget something - such marketing tactics are only really necessary in highly competitive marketplaces. The Middlebury College Book Store is the only Middlebury College Book Store on campus, and thus should focus the use of its capital on better service and lower prices for students rather than unnecessary, elaborate stunts. Oversight is necessary to ensure that whatever reduced prices the Book Store can provide are shared equally by all students, and not selectively handed out to those who most vocally promote the store. Such word-of-mouth advertising is clearly artificial, and will occur naturally if the store truly excels at catering to the College's needs. Mr. Jansen's effort is admirable but his methods are misguided.

Sincerely,

Roger Perreault '09


To the Editor:

In response to the article "Middlebury's Social Scene Debunked" (Oct. 18) written by Dicky Redmond, I have to strongly disagree on his views of the Middlebury social scene as compared with the Amherst scene. Granted, it's been over a year since I graduated from Midd, so perhaps things have changed since then, but here are my views. Having had a twin brother who went to Amherst, he'd be the first to tell you that the Amherst "social scene" is nearly entirely made up of athletes. As a basketball player, he openly admits that his friends were fully made up of other athletes. He came back from school freshmen winter break and pronounced to our family at the dinner table, "I have officially met every kid in my class that I will ever be friends with."

I took great pride in saying that that was not the case at Midd. You could walk through the campus, look around, and not have a clue who was an athlete and who was not. You could go to parties where large varieties of people from wide ranging backgrounds were gathered. Sure sports teams tended to gather in their own groups, but that would be in their own groups among a larger party. It's inevitable that tight bonds will be formed among teams, but at Middlebury, that doesn't mean those will be the only friends they make in their four years of college.

I loved the fact that Middlebury was a place where friendships were made across all groups and boundaries, all social groups and stereotypes. And I agree with Dicky Redmond's comment, that friendships are still made during junior and senior year, and the bonds across the whole class are made then, not freshmen and sophomore year.

But believe me, the Amherst social scene does not even relate to the Midd social scene, it has no comparison. And Midd-kids should take pride that we go to Midd, and not Amherst.

Sincerely,
Alex Casnocha '06


To the Editor:

People should drink more water - whether bottled or tap. In fact, for three-quarters of consumers, it's not an either/or choice between bottled and tap water. They drink both. More than 70 percent of what Americans drink today comes in a bottle or can. In a choice between those beverages, bottled water is popular because it fills people's need for a portable, easily accessible, healthful alternative to soda. It also has a lighter environmental footprint than other packaged beverages. Our new Eco-Shape bottle uses the least plastic of any half-liter bottle currently on store shelves. We make 98 percent of our single-serve PET bottles, eliminating the need to truck 160,000 loads of empty bottles into our plants, saving 6.6 million gallons of fuel per year. And, while plastic water bottles contribute less than one-third of one percent of the municipal waste stream in this country, we are advocating for expanded recycling programs that would keep a greater number of all plastic containers - regardless of what they contain - out of landfills. We agree there is a critical need for a safe and reliable drinking water in many regions of the world. We ensure our work in the U.S. is sustainable and we contribute to our parent company's efforts to deal with global water challenges. Tap water is a public utility and bottled water is a beverage product. They do not compete with each other. Both fill important roles and they can and do coexist. We believe Rachael Jennings' article misses that point.

Sincerely,

Brian Flaherty
Nestle Waters North America


To the Editor:

The recent backlash against bottled water simply doesn't hold water. Bottled water provides a convenient, healthy beverage that you can take everywhere you go, staying hydrated throughout the day. It's contributing to Americans drinking more water today - whether from a bottle or a tap - which is a good thing in our health-conscious, on-the-go society. While purified bottled water often begins with a municipal source, it is much more than just tap water. This water is put through a rigorous purification process to remove impurities, such as salts and chlorides, and create a consistent, high-quality taste. Purified bottled water is regulated by the FDA, which imposes standards for bottled water that are at least as stringent and protective of public health as those set by the EPA for public water systems.

As for the environment, critics often engage in hyperbole when it comes to the impact of bottled water. But our environmental impact is minimal, particularly compared to other industries, and constantly improving. Let's start with the fact that bottled water comes in 100 percent recyclable containers - how many products can make that claim? Then the oil figures activists cite that plastic water bottles account for a miniscule 0.02 percent of America's oil consumption. And, plastic water bottles contribute only one-third of one percent to the municipal waste stream. Nevertheless, our industry continues to improve on its environmental footprint, which is why we are constantly working to reduce the material in our packaging, become more energy efficient and improve recycling rates. We are also a founding member, along with the EPA, of the National Recycling Partnership dedicated to revitalizing recycling.

Sincerely,

Kevin Keane
Senior Vice President, American Beverage Association