Opinion
The University Daily Kansan
Laura Roddy, Editor
Sarah Hale, Managing editor
Kristi Elliot, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news advisor
Shauntae Blue, Business manager
Brad Bolydary, Sales manager
Matt Fisher, Sales and marketing adviser
Scott Vallier, Technology coordinator
Thursday, March 16, 2000
Seth Jones / KANSAN
Editorials
Restricting speech not the answer to preventing bigotry, intolerance
A bill to amend the Code of Student Rights and Responsibilities was introduced to a Student Senate standing committee last week. The bill would have instituted a new University of Kansas policy, banning the use of "hate" words that attack race or sexual orientation.
The proposal was withdrawn by its sponsors during committee discussion. However, it will be resubmitted later this semester.
The bill would give students who thought they had been verbally attacked the chance to press charges and seek disciplinary action through the University.
The use of racial epithets or words attacking someone's sexual orientation shouldn't be condoned or overlooked. The bill's sponsors are correct in seeking a solution to racism, bigotry and intolerance.
Potential Student Senate bill would curb free expression, set dangerous precedent
But banning the use of any words, thus restricting free speech, is not the appropriate solution. Free speech of any kind is something that no legislative body has the jurisdiction to restrict. Free speech is a cornerstone of the U.S. Constitution. It is the basis for democratic institutions and maintaining the concept of equal rights and opportunities in a country with the largest number of minorities in the world
It is true that, just like everything else that has such enormous power, free speech potentially can be used in a negative way and allow certain people to use "hate" words and discriminate against or insult fellow humans.
Curbing free speech, however, would set an extremely dangerous precedent. We cannot respond to bigotry and intolerance by trying to restrict and suppress people. Restriction and suppression are the practices we are seeking to eliminate.
Bigotry and intolerance can be cured only with education and tolerance. The right to free speech is the core of American society. This right can by no means be disputed or adjusted.
Cynthia Malakasis for the editorial board
University should cover film costs
Students who take courses in the film department must pay an extra $25 for a film voucher. In these classes, students are saddled with the responsibility of keeping a department fiscally afloat. These funds are necessary. However, the responsibility for financing departments lies with the University of Kansas and should not be passed on to the students.
The money raised from film pass sales is supposed to pay for the rental of films and defray the costs of equipment maintenance. The theater and film department needs this money, and the voucher is one of the methods available for an under-financed department that needs to keep itself in the black
Why doesn't the department have adequate funding? One reason may be
What if courses required photocopying passes to defray the cost of class handouts?
the perceived lack of importance of the theater and film discipline. In terms of film, it may be difficult to appreciate the importance of studying elements of popular culture. On the other hand, programs in engineering and business, for example, have a more easily identifiable application.
But liberal arts programs are vital. They link the University to contemporary issues. More importantly, they link these issues with an academic venue so that they can be considered in a scholarly manner. Still, liberal studies
such as film are forced to turn to outside sources such as the film pass for funds.
The film pass highlights a potentially abusive system. If the University is not willing to wholeheartedly finance these programs, students will have an increasing financial burden. A film pass might seem innocuous enough, but soon, photocopying vouchers might be required to defray the costs of handouts for almost any class.
When a department must charge additional fees across the board for its classes, chances are that they are not getting enough financial support from the University. The best solution for any ancillary fees is for the University to reevaluate its budgeting priorities, rather than let the burden unfairly fall to students.
Brett Watson for the editorial board
Kansan staff
Seth Hoffman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editorial
Nadia Mustafa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editorial
Melody Ard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News/Special sections
Chris Fickett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News
Julie Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News
Juan H. Heath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online
Mike Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sports
Matt James . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Associate sports
Katie Hollar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Campus
Nathan Willis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Campus
Heather Woodward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Features
Chris Borniger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Associate features
T.J. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photo imaging
Christina Neff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photo
Jason Pearce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Design, graphics
Clay McCuistion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wire
News editors
Advertising managers
Becky LaBranch . . . . . . .Special sections
Krista Lindemann . . . . . . .Campus
Ryan Riggin . . . . . . .Regional
Jason Hannah . . . . . . .National
Will Baxter . . . . . .Online sales
Patrick Rupe . . . . . .Online creative
Seth Schwimmer . . . . .Marketing
Jenny Weaver . . . . .Creative layout
Matt Thomas . . . . .Assistant creative
Kenna Crone . . . . .Assistant creative
Trent Guyer . . . . .Classifieds
Jon Schlitt . . . . .Zone
Thad Crane . . . . .Zone
Cecily Curran . . . . Zone
Christy Davies . . . . Zone
Advertising managers
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed." — Martin Luther King, Jr.
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
How to submit letters and guest columns
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words The writer must be willing to be photocarried for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be e-mailed to opinion@kansan.com or submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Nadia Mustafa or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
The School of Journalism, like the School of Architecture, has decided to change its curriculum. The Kansan has been silent on this topic. In spite of this silence, many students are disgusted by the change.
Julie Wood columnist
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff [opinion@kansan.com] or call 864-4924
the idea that integrating the capabilities of the Internet makes it imperative for journalists to know how to present news through many different media, such as print, radio and broadcast. Convergence is a nice way of saying journalism students will learn three times as many skills in roughly the same amount of time.
The new curriculum's downfall is that the process involved little student input and forgets the basics
Modernized curriculum not good for journalism
change has ramifications beyond the School of Journalism, and it's going to affect you, too.
Perspective
Professors say they relied on recent graduates' advice for how to better prepare students to enter the work force. But Ann Marchand, a KU graduate who now works at The Washington Post and will soon be moving to washingtonpost.com, said that employers were not interested in her Internet experience. She said Internet companies believed that anyone could learn how to put up a Web site.
Journism, and it's going to anger you too. Even with the added skills, professors have said that the quality won't suffer because they still will hold students to the same high standards in writing and editing. But that's impossible. Without having class time to spend refining those skills, standards will have to lower because professors won't even have time to teach advanced skills. That's akin to buying a car with all the bells and whistles but leaving out the engine.
"They were looking for someone who had news judgment and copy-editing skills as well as familiarity with the processes of a daily paper," Marchand said. "One online class would've helped, but anything beyond that might have cost valuable time spent refining my editing abilities. I know this situation isn't unique to me; I was also recruited by AOL, and people there said that they look first and foremost for people with news skills."
The new curriculum was announced in December after a series of meetings among University of Kansas professors. The only formal student involvement was when Dean Jimmy Gentry was interviewed at the University. He said he had met with more than 100 students in small groups. Professors also have said that they had asked students for their views. But this did not ensure that student views would be heard in the meetings. Even Gentry admitted that a case could be made for more student involvement in the process. For a school that teaches the practice of the First Amendment, it is disheartening that it didn't allow a formal voice to the most heavily vested constituents — students.
KU alumnus, Aaron Knop, who now works at MSNBC.com, said he thought editing and writing skills were more important than having skills in different media. He said that where he works, employees still specialized.
Student concerns also can be ignored because the students who know enough about the old curriculum to protest changes to it will be graduating in May or will only be here one more year. Professors only have to wait a year to receive a
One plus of the new curriculum is that students can be five credit hours into the journalism school before they have to decide on a specialization. Many prerequisites were scrapped because all students will have the requirement necessary to take most classes because of the five beginning credit hours. The most advanced classes now are mandatory with the new system.
The new curriculum is based on convergence-
new batch of students who don't know how good the old system was.
For example, the old system required only newspaper majors to take Reporting II. Now all news/information students have to take an advanced course to graduate, which means they have to work for some type of student publication.
The new curriculum affects more than just journalism students. By teaching more than double the number of skills in the same amount of time, the most vital parts of journalism — refinement in writing, editing and reporting — will suffer. And the students taking this new curriculum will work for campus media without being prepared. This will cause the overall quality, including the Kansan's, to suffer. Expect more mistakes, less accuracy and poorer quality writing in the future because of the new curriculum.
Wood is a Davenport, Iowa, senior in journalism and political science.
Fiery economic growth stokes rich, burns poor
Despite rapid economic growth, low unemployment and low inflation, economic inequality is rampant in America. While politicians and mainstream news outlets focus on the economic status quo — touting global supremacy and higher market share as ultimate virtues
Times are undoubtedly good, though. The budget is balanced. Unemployment is down, as is crime. For the first time in history, this nation has no major rival around the globe — economically, politically or even ideologically. We are, indisputably, No. 1.
zation, United for a Fair Economy (www.ufenet.org), offers a reality check, demystifying the hyperbolic rhetoric of the pundits-cum-propagandists: "The record-breaking economic boom of the 1900s has left Americans more polarized and debt-ridden." A rising tide "has lifted the yachts to tremendous heights, but many Americans are still bailing out their boats after decades of sinking real wages." Ten years ago, there were 66 billionaires and 31.5 million people living below the poverty line in the United States. Today, the United States boasts 268 billionaires and 34.5 million people living below the official poverty line — about $13,000 for a three-person family.
But a Boston-based organi
millions of Americans are denied health care benefits, food stamps and adequate housing to balance the budget and fill the coffers of transnational corporations.
Clearly, the economic power structure means incredible wealth for a few and untold poverty for many. "The top 1 percent of households has more wealth than the entire bottom 95 percent combined," the UFE reports. "Since 1977, the top 1 percent has doubled its share of the nation's wealth to 40 percent."
Ben
Embry
guest columnist
opinion@kansan.com
Critics claim that these figures do not fully reflect the improvement in the standard of living of Americans across the board. A fair point.
According to a recent article in U.S. News and World Report, each person in the average household today has 814 square feet of living space compared with 478 square feet in 1970. And, 62 percent
In the Declaration of Independence, life is enshrined as one of the three "inmanable rights" that flow to Americans by virtue of having been "created equal." The pervasive economic disparity in the midst of great wealth surely violates that right and mocks the most basic democratic ideals. As a result, we have to look seriously at measures to mitigate inequality on all fronts. The wealth tax is such a measure.
According to economist Edward Wolff, a Swiss wealth tax model applied to the United States would not require great sacrifices by the American people, most of whom would pay virtually nothing. In fact, the first $100,000 of net worth would be exempt, eliminating two-thirds of all households from having to pay any wealth tax. If such a tax were in effect, it would raise about $40 billion this year that could be used to pay for reforming welfare or health care, investing in education or technical innovation or replacing existing taxes that cripple the middle class.
Embry is a Lawrence graduate student in journalism.
of all households own two or more vehicles compared with 29 percent back then. However, despite the dramatic growth in consumption, the gap in wealth and assets is even larger than the income gap, with the richest 1 percent of Americans owning almost 40 percent of the nation's wealth, and the poorest 80 percent owning 16 percent.
Although many forces contribute to the increasing economic disparity between income groups—including rapid economic and technological change—in the final analysis, the major difficulty, as suggested by Daniel Bell in The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism, is twofold: American society lacks both the willingness to make sacrifices for some public good and a political philosophy that justifies such civic sacrifices. The question, then, is whether we can arrive at a social compact that seeks to protect liberty, reward achievement and enhance the social good.
Contrary to Republican philosophy, economic disparity will not be rectified by tax cuts for the upper class or corporate welfare programs. Indeed, those are the sort of policies that helped cause the gap to grow in the first place. The gap is unhealthy and unfair. It is a problem that, ultimately, can be solved by a wealth tax similar to those in other developed nations.
Feedback
Pinochet trial to be just
As a Chilean citizen, I would like to comment on the March 9 editorial about Pinochet.
First, there's no accent mark on Chile or Chilean. Second, Pinochet went to Britain for medical treatment, not as a
Spain and Britain.
diplomat. The other events, such as his detainment, followed. Pinochet's alliance with Britain was not the major factor in letting him free. Spain is Chile's commercial partner and there has been a lot of pressure from Chilean entrepreneurs and government to get Pinochet back to maintain healthy relations with
Pinochet's eventual trial will be an example of justice and a call for the international community to prevent similar atrocities in the future.
Hector Magana-Cabrera Lawrence graduate student