For weeks the Tufts community was abuzz in anticipation of the announcement of this year's commencement speaker. Students wondered which big-name politician, entertainer, or athlete would be coming to the Tufts campus. And with Al Gore, Bill Bradley, Bill Cosby, Jim Lehrer, and now Bill Clinton headlining the list of recent visits, we felt as if the sky was the limit for the graduation address.
Then came the announcement. This year, we're getting Pierre Omidyar and his wife Pam. Not quite the caliber of speaker that most students were expecting. Now even though the Omidyar's have a very nice Tufts story, and have done so much for the University, I don't see them as appropriate speakers in the context of this year's commencement.
The graduation address is the biggest speech of the year at any college or university - period. Which means that if you've had Clinton, Gore, Powell, and Cosby, you've got to have at least an equally important person doing the graduation address. Not Pierre and Pam Omidyar. That would be like having escargot, shrimp cocktail, and Caesar salad for appetizers and having a Big Mac for your main course. Even though a Big Mac is pretty good; its not that great after fancy appetizers. Considering that commencement is the culmination of well over 1,000 Tufts careers, this seems rather anti-climactic.
The commencement speech is something that the graduating seniors take with them for the rest of their lives. Bono, from the band U2, recently did the commencement speech at Harvard University. Now I agree it's not fair to compare Tufts to Harvard, but here's another instance where they get the point and we don't. Students don't want regular - albeit distinguished - visitors (the Omidyars have visited Tufts twice in the past two years); we want Bono. We want to tell people in ten years, who have never heard of Tufts, "Hey Tufts was pretty good. You know who spoke at my graduation? Bono."
I am sure that the Omidyars will give a great speech. One that will resonate in the hearts of all those who hear it, and many at Tufts will be happy with the decision. But it will leave others wondering exactly how the speakers were selected.
Now while my last few points were attempts at humor, the real problem with having the Omidyars speak at graduation is that they have made such extensive financial contributions to the University. It's not like they were the first choice for the Princeton graduation, and we lured them away with a higher bid. No, being significant University donors, the Omidyars obviously had an advantage in being selected as commencement speaker. Their prominence at Tufts is due, in great part, to their tremendous wealth and their generous contributions to the University. I don't believe that's reason enough for them to speak at commencement.
If we set a precedent of selecting wealthy and generous Tufts trustees, we will miss all those great, memorable speakers whose prominence is based on factors other than wealth and philanthropy. I'm sure there are plenty of civic-minded alumni, like the Omidyars, who love Tufts and could give a rousing speech. In this particular case, then, it's hard to deny a connection between the speaker and his generosity to Tufts.
Another problem is that the speakers of this sort have the potential to become incredibly boring. If anyone has ever seen or been in a business meeting, you know they aren't very exciting. So if every year we have a businessman or a heavy donor deliver the address, the audience is going to fall asleep.
So, how should the administration pick the speaker for next year? We need a formula. So in the spirit of Pierre Omidyar and the Tufts administration, the best way to decide who gives the speech is to auction it off on eBay.
Daniel Lang is a junior majoring in quantities economics.
