In response to the recent Valley News articles concerning professor Gilbert Welch (“Dartmouth Researcher Quits Post” Sept. 14), I write to share my own experience because it stands in sharp contrast to the image portrayed in this newspaper thus far.
As an early career medical school faculty member and physician at the White River Junction VA Medical Center in 2003, and later as a student at The Dartmouth Institute in 2012, I could not have asked for a better senior colleague and educator. At the VA, Welch was warm and welcoming; he made sure I felt valued. At TDI, he had obviously studied what made some professors great and poured his heart and soul into his lectures to ensure they were relevant, clear and engaging. His reputation as a classroom professor was stellar.
During that time, I was fortunate also to collaborate with him on an analysis of trends in cardiology services. Though it probably would have been easier to do it alone, he coached me through the process and insisted I take the lead as first author. His love of teaching and mentoring was clear. The hours we spent poring over tables and graphs, knocking around ideas and laughing are among my favorite professional memories.
Bruce W. Andrus
Norwich
In his recent column on Serena Williams (“IMHO: Double Standards Exist in Tennis, but Serena Was Still Wrong,” Sept. 14) Greg Fennell notes the rarity of game penalties and asks, “Name a time when that happened to man.” The answer is 2016, in the finals of the Istanbul Open, when Grigor Dimitrov lost the finals match on a game penalty. He also notes that, “There is most certainly a double standard in tennis when it comes to behavior.” Yet Jeff Sackmann, in his excellent blog on tennis analytics, notes that data show that on a comparable basis men are penalized more often than women in professional tennis.
I don’t disagree with Fennell’s column — I think his conclusions are spot on. But it makes me uncomfortable when relevant facts are overlooked. In more important realms than tennis, overlooking facts is really hurting our country, and many of us — the majority, I hope — still rely on the “mainstream media” to dig out the facts and report on them. That discipline should apply everywhere, not just on the front page.
Jonathan Spector
Woodstock
Snopes.com recently reported that President Donald Trump had promised to address what he says is the “very serious situation” of social media companies “suppressing” conservative voices. Though the so-called president’s interpretation of reality may be questionable, I agree the various social media platforms should be subject to regulation and public oversight. I believe it to be a safe bet that my solution would be radically different from Trump’s.
The Federal Communications Commission is the regulator for television, radio and the internet. The commission managed the broadcast world fairly effectively (though George Carlin had words for that). More recently, Sinclair Broadcasting came along wanting to rule the airwaves, which was OK with the FCC. Fortunately, Tribune Media pulled out of the $3.9 billion deal and the monopoly was avoided. Nonetheless, that the regulator gave the green light to a nationwide propagandist causes me to think that the FCC may be regulated, but only poorly so. Similarly, the FCC took away net neutrality rules, with big business media barons preferred over the little guys. For example, Verizon Wireless stifled the Santa Clara County Fire Department’s data usage amid a historic wildfire in July of this year. Fit for office? I think there’s a paucity of that in the current regime.
The elephant (symbolically enough) in the room is social media, running roughshod and mostly unregulated. When a shortcoming in the government becomes apparent, it behooves the overseers to address it. I would like to see a panel of diverse citizens (artists, activists, youths, scientists, firefighters, etc.) supply oversight to the FCC and each social media platform. Each prospective panelist should swear allegiance to the rightful dominance of human interests over corporate interests, and the panelists should be term-limited. Do you think Trump and his colleagues would agree?
Kevin McEvoy Leveret
White River Junction
First off, thank you to the recent letter writers for visiting Salt hill Pub (“The Last Straw,” Sept. 4, and “Businesses Helping the Environment,” Sept. 13). We have indeed launched a “no straws at the hill” campaign, in which stirrers and compostable drink straws are available on request. There is plenty of information out there about plastic pollution, as well as state and local efforts to address the problem, and we encourage people to do their own research. For now, we’re simply trying to reduce our plastic footprint and offer an alternative for those who do want to use a straw. (And don’t worry, there are no fines or penalties for doing so …)
Josh Tuohy
Lebanon
The writer is co-owner of the five Salt hill Pub locations.