‘Greece and Cyprus, that is a waste of money’, said De Bongerd canteen employee John Schouten in the last Resource. Resource received complaints from Greek students. They argue that Schoutens remark is racist and irrelevant.
I am personally a great supporter of the freedom of expression. I have been also a great fan of Resource magazine and of what it stands for (promotion of the research and social status of Wageningen UR) for more than six years now. However, I was rather astonished when I read the last issue. In page 23, a person is expressing his opinion on a question probably raised by the magazine on the added value of Monarchy in the Netherlands. In his answer, this person, incorporates his negative opinion about Greece and Cyprus to support his suggestion/answer. Every person has his/her opinion and this opinion should be respected of course. However, I am curious on whether a magazine with a certain scope should incorporate such opinions. Opinions that have no relation at all with the scope of the magazine. Opinions that can raise negative feelings and unwanted reactions of the ambassadors of these countries in Wageningen University. Opinions that can have a great impact on the so well-kept international status of this university. Thank you for the consideration. I hope that the magazine will consider this as something to be publicly corrected/explained to avoid further reactions.