Home of the American Heritage student newspaper

Campaigning ruins superlatives

in Opinion by

With the release of superlative voting last week, the senior class faced numerous questions such as “who is most likely to be president?” and “who are the most memorable best friends?” Once again, seniors took to social media, especially the class Facebook page, to campaign for themselves. While entertaining, most campaigns didn’t represent the person running.

When I look back at the yearbook 20 years from now, I want to look at the photo under “most likely to go pro” and instantly remember the winner’s skills, not the tweets he or she sent out to win a slot in Heritage history. Most people don’t realize how superlatives are intended to work; they aren’t supposed to be popularity contests such as Homecoming queen and king. Superlatives serve to represent someone in the class. There’s no point in running for a superlative if you know you aren’t the “most artistic” or don’t have “the worst case of senioritis.” This completely tarnishes the legitimacy and point of the section, wasting space in the yearbook that many students typically look forward to.

Even though most posts were jokes, they can still sway the voting, leaving deserving winners (literally) out of the picture.

To combat the superlative craze, voting should be administered one day only during English class. By having the yearbook staff and administration team up to carry this out, not only will there be no time to campaign, but students would pick the candidate who instantly comes to mind when reading the categories.

A superlative winner should be recognizable among the majority of the class, not someone who took advantage of social media. Although the voting has already ended, think twice before voting for superlatives further down the road in college, camp, or clubs.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Latest from Opinion

Go to Top