USC's fully enclosed fencing is keeping local community members out on purpose

Question

USC now fully fenced in campus sends a message to community members that they have to belong specifically to the USC community to access certain buildings and recreational facilities. A Daily Trojan article details the other times in the past where the university has made developments to enhance security, but to what extent is the school oppressing outsiders who many not pose a specific harm?

https://dailytrojan.com/2024/12/05/usc-fully-enclosed-by-permanent-fencing/

Answer 1

While the article notes that fencing around USC has increased over decades, particularly following the 1984 Olympics, the main intentions of the fences seems to be on improving security in response to incidents, such as a shooting in 2013. The writer suggests that the intentions behind the fencing is primarily related to security and safety concerns — due to an increase in campus activities — rather than an exclusion of local communities. However, many community members and students of USC, view the fencing as unnecessary and an exclusion of non-USC community members. They argue that the fences actually inflict more harm and danger, but these are just opinions from a student and not a direct indication by the university. Therefore, there is no specific proof or statistic that states that USC is implementing fences to exclude local communities. 

Answer 2

This is an excellent source chosen from USC's student-led press, as I found they compelling chronicle the history of the campus's enclosure structures, from fences to brick walls, and, more contextually important, what events prompted such actions, whether it be unruly crowds from the '84 Olympics or gang shootings between non-USC students. Such measures are explicitly indicative of the claim you have made. 

USC fully enclosed by permanent fencing - Daily Trojan

Comments

As a staff member at the Daily Trojan, I have access to the sourcing used by the article's writer. For one, the sourcing about Utyengsu Aquatics Center is a bit hazy as I personally have seen children below 16 in the pool and the source provided is from 1993 so that is definitely not true. The sourcing about University avenue being closed is trustworthy as it comes from USC PR who have no incentive to lie. In general, I would argue that from personal experience the campus is only really closed to the general public at night-- which I believe it always was at least in theory-- but the isolation is largely psychological due to the fences.

Here is the problematic source that was used for Utyengsu: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-03-21-ci-13703-story.html#:~:text=Before%20the%201984,on%20Vermont%20Avenue

Answer 3

According to the claim that you made, in said article that you presented. That does not coincide with what the article speaks about. Nowhere is it claiming to keep communities out of the campus, all it speaks about is its responses from protesting throughout the decades and how some students are unhappy about the change. However, it never states how USC is trying to isolate the outside communities.