GANGULY: Brittany Gibson has never read the Centurion

Amit Ganguly

Recently, an opinion column from our illustrious, noble, and ABSOLUTELY unbiased friends at the Daily Targum addressed our "offensive" publication that is "without a clear mission statement beyond creating controversy" (there is a mission statement, I do not see how any party without an extreme and overbearing bias and a need to confirm said bias could read that statement and describe it as not much "beyond creating controversy"). Needless to say, it was both hilarious and pitiful.

Now, let us comb through the article, top to bottom, and see what Brittany Gibson gets wrong about the Centurion. Gibson starts with a passive aggressive note about how our Facebook presence is sometimes offensive. This does nothing for her argument, but it is good rhetoric, and I only mention it here to provide a preview of the rest of the article. 

Moving on, she adds a disclaimer about her full fledged support for clearly labeled partisan writing and the freedom of the press, something else invariably bland and rhetorical that does not actually add to her argument. After this fluff, she misrepresents our mission statement without actually citing our mission statement, and goes on to misrepresent almost everything else. 

Gibson says that the Centurion being revived makes her believe that conservative groups on campus are not interested in whether the university takes sides, but whether everyone else takes our side. The first part of that statement is obviously wrong, and a look at articles talking about Barchi and DACA or faculty donations could prove this to anyone, but not our resident sleuth Brittany Gibson; she needs no research nor does she need to support her argument. Her second notion in the statement is redundant. Yes Brittany, as a political advocacy group on campus, we DO care about student support, that was a VERY astute observation! 

The next paragraph is dedicated to the history of the Centurion, and the one after that, dedicated to defaming the Centurion (like most of the article) with misdirection and rhetoric. Citing a quote from Tent State University, (whose website notes it supports progressive activists, something Gibson neglects to mention) the previous iteration of the Centurion is described as aggressive and disruptive. Inputting a rhetorical "Sound familiar?", Gibson has yet to cite a statement from those associated with the Centurion, or to cite an article to support her argument. What she has done is made an implication without evidence to falsely equate the current Centurion to the past version, not to mention her basis for the past version being undesirable is a leftist activism group. The only thing she has not done? Support her argument.

Unfortunately for us, this article carries on. Gibson continues beating the dead horse of the past Centurion and equating quotes about being offensive to being incorrect, following a trend of alleging that offense invalidates truth (but that is for another article). Mentioning the death of the original Centurion, we jump forward to 2013, and Gibson notes that she does not think showing that conservatism is alive on at Rutgers is a bad idea (unless, of course, it offends her). After this Gibson talks about how the old Twitter for the Centurion and the old domain are inactive. And for the first time in this entire article, she cites a piece from the Centurion. Why, you might ask? Has she finally supported a claim?


Gibson simply cites it to note that it took months after the creation of this website for an article to be put up. By now I shouldn't have to say it, but this doesn't help her argument. 

Here we reach the end of the article. As I have actually bothered to demonstrate my argument that Brittany has no argument and simply hates the Centurion with a passion, she taunts me by putting all the evidence I need at the end of what is frankly a trash heap of an opinion piece. 

"The Centurion’s production lacks any direction, mission or purpose besides trying to upset students, which will inevitably cause the paper to fail — again. And if in a few years after it restarts, I look forward to reading about it in other University publications. 

Having cited no evidence relating to the current Centurion (barring a scathing remark about us taking a while to post an article) Brittany Gibson has smugly and righteously, in a storm of offense and reeking moral indignation, proclaimed the death of the Centurion. I am sorry to see it happen so fast friends, it is time to jump ship. As Brittany expertly supports, our publication lacks direction, I mean, look at these articles, not one is blatantly left-leaning, and some might even CHALLENGE YOUR VIEWS?! It is an outrage! Everyone should stick to the Targum, where at least they can rest assured they'll invariably see some left leaning political cartoon to confirm their biases.

Jokes aside, Brittany, you're in college. If you really can't handle our publication, you have far larger worries than writing a mess of an article about it. If you assume something is flat out wrong because it offends you, you are directly inhibiting the growth of your own knowledge and character. 

From all of us at the Centurion, grow up.