Why are we Cynical? A Semantic Analysis of College Newspaper Opinions

Cynicism, a distrust of people and institutions, creates serious obstacles for building social unity and working together effectively. <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">3, 14</sup> In this paper, we study how signs of cynicism have been growing in the opinions section of the Stanford Daily and the Harvard Crimson - two of the most respected US colleges. While this study focuses specifically on these two elite institutions, providing an in-depth analysis within their unique contexts from 2010 to 2024, our analysis shows that their students have been writing about a narrower set of topics over time, resulting in a shrinking space of ideas in the opinion sections of both elite colleges’ student newspapers. We then use semantic, sentiment, and lexical analysis to understand how cynical rhetoric has evolved. While our hypothesis focuses on the divergence between the rising rhetoric of diversity and the shrinking space of ideas leading to cynical attitudes toward diversity programs, we acknowledge potential alternative explanations. These include broader societal shifts in political polarization and declining trust in institutions, as well as changes in media consumption habits, such as increased reliance on social media and personalized news feeds, which could contribute to echo chambers and narrowed discourse. Understanding these dynamics within the college context, while also recognizing its relevance to broader trends, is crucial for fostering a more open and trusting academic environment. Through surfacing quantitative observational studies, we hope our findings can help find ways to encourage more inclusive conversations and make Stanford and Harvard a more welcoming place for all opinions and potentially inform future studies on a wider range of institutions.