Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Ann Premer, Editor
Gerry Doyle, Managing editor
Angie Kuhn, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
4A
Jamie Holman, Business manager
Sara Cropp, Retail sales manager
Simon Simon, Sales and marketing adviser
Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Wednesday, March 17, 1999
The Chicago Tribune
Editorials
KU Mock Trial Team to compete with little help from University
A University of Kansas team will compete in the National Tournament of the American Mock Trial Association next month with little help from the school that it is representing.
The KU Mock Trial Team, which has qualified for the national competition for the second year in a row, not only has to prepare for the competition but also has to raise or contribute the $1,200 needed to attend.
Team members hope to raise the needed money this week by having students fill out credit card applications on Wescoe Beach today and tomorrow.
The original Mock Trial budget, which has little money left after a season of competition, came from the Kansas Bar Association and donations from law firms.
The team must find alternate ways to finance its trip because of a depleted budget.
The team has been denied funding by Student Senate and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. In addition, the team has petitioned unsuccessfully several student organizations such as Phi Alpha Delta pre-law society and the Student Bar Association.
Fortunately the KU law school, which is not part of undergraduate studies, has offered to help with some travel expenses by paying for a van rental for the trip to Des Moines, Iowa.
where the competition will be held. State Rep. Barbara Ballard, D-Lawrence, and State Rep. Troy Findley, D-Lawrence, have proposed legislation that would give state recognition to the team, yet the University offers no assistance.
A team that competes in a national competition brings prestige to the University. The University should recognize and support such teams.
KU Mock Trial Team members have worked hard and have put in many hours of practice to make it to this level. It is unfair that they now face the possible situation of having to pay their own way as well.
Students can do what the University has not by taking the time to fill out a credit card application this week.
Katrina Hull for the editorial board
Racial comments not joke material
Freedom of speech is one of the many rights that U.S. citizens cherish. In some instances, the line is crossed, and it becomes apparent that certain people do not have the capability of using this freedom responsibly. An example happened recently in Washington, D.C.
Doug "Greaseman" Tracht, a disc jockey in the D.C. area, was fired from his job because of a highly inappropriate and tasteless remark. After a song by African-American singer Lauryn Hill played, Tracht quipped, "No wonder people drag them behind trucks."
The remark was in reference to a gruesome murder in Texas. In that case, John William King was convicted and sentenced to death for dragging James Byrd, an African-American man, to his death behind a pickup truck. Given the violent circumstances
A radio station should have fired a disc jockey before he made two offensive remarks.
of Byrd's murder, this remark went beyond being tasteless.
Tracht was not a first time offender, which is one of the reasons why he was fired. With a debate raging on his show about whether Martin Luther King Jr. Day should be a holiday, Tracht said that if four more African Americans were killed, people in the country might be given a full week off.
Tracht was not fired for this first offense, but he did apologize. Obviously, this apology was lacking sincerity.
CNN program Both Sides. Tracht apologized profusely and claimed to be a loving man. Tracht wants to apologize to African Americans across the country, and he also wants to reach out to his former listeners to let them know that what he said was not funny and that it was wrong.
Now Tracchi is on an apology tour, and he recently anounced on Jesse Jackson's
Tracht thinks he should be able to get another job on air to spread his message. At this point, it is hard to believe anyone would believe anything coming from Tracht's lips.
The radio station deserves applause for firing Tracht, a popular disc jockey. Such a turgid display of racism should not be tolerated. One only hopes that Tracht means his apologies and can somehow help alleviate much of the racial hatred that still exists in this country.
Kansan staff
Ryan Koerner . . . Editorial
Jeremy Doherty . . . Associate editorial
Aaron Marvin . . . News
Laura Roddy . . . Nees
Melissa Ngo . . . Nees
Aaron Knopf . . Online
Erin Thompson . . Sports
Marc Sheforden . . Associate sports
Chris Fickett . . Campus
Sarah Hale . . Campus
T.R. Miller . . Features
Steph Brewer .Associate features
Augustus Anthony Piazza . Photo
Chris Dye .Design, graphics
Carl Kaminski .Wire
Carolyn Mollett .Special sections
Laura Veazey .News clerk
Emily Haverkamp for the editorial board
News editors
Advertising managers
Marketing manager
Matt Lopez . . . Special sections
Jennifer Patch . . . Campus
Micah Kaftiz . . . Regional
Jon Schlitt . . National
Tyler Cook . . . Marketing
Shannon Curran . PR/Intern manager
Christa Estep . Production
Steven Prince . Production
Chris Corley . Creative
Jason Hannah . Classified
Corinne Buffmire . Zone
莎安tae Blue . Zone
Brandi Byram . Zone
Brian Allers . Zone
Justin Allen . Zone
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"We thought, because we had power, we had wisdom."—Stephen Vincent Benet
How to submit letters and guest columns
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 home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staufer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Ryan Koerer or Jerome Doherty at 864-4924.
Guest columns: Should be double-
spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
William M.
Tsutsui
If you have general questions or comments,
e-mail the page staff {opinion@kansan.com}
or call 864-4924.
Asian-American issues deserve equal attention
In late February, a swastika was burned onto the door of an Asian-American resident of Oliver Hall. The vandalism was duly reported in the media, but elicited few cries of public indignation and ratred.
plain indignation and rated only a pallid official response.
The KU Public Safety Office was loath to judge it a hate crime, and the Department of Student Housing was quick to label it as a "random event." A flaming wastakia, we were assured, was just another isolated act of vandalism. That threatening act was directed against an Asian American, so they tell us, was accidental and inconsequential, and did not reflect racial hatred.
Perspective
Regrettably, such indifference to anti-Asian racism extends far beyond Mount Oread. A few weeks ago, actor Matthew McConaughey spoke blithely of "fightin' Japs from World War II" during an appearance on The Rosie O'Donnell Show. The audience did not react negatively to this slur, and neither did O'Donnell. Demands for an apology from the Media Action Network for Asian Americans fell on deaf ears. Apparently, even in an age when the word "niggardly" has been condemned as racially offensive, the degrading term "Japs" still is considered acceptable.
Indeed, our society — including this campus — appears in denial when it comes to discrimination against Asian Americans. We tend to think of Americans of Asian descent as an over-achieving model minority; highly educated, successful professionally and well-integrated into mainstream American culture. Against this background, it's easy to dismiss anti-Asian racism as isolated, irrelevant or somehow less disturbing than prejudice toward other groups. It also is easy to forget that not all bigotry is as overt as a burning swastika.
A month ago, Chancellor Hemenway graciously conducted a reception for the Asian-American Student Union. It was an enjoyable event, casual, festive, and well-attended by students and administrators. A series of speakers praised diversity and told the crowd how important Asian Americans are to the University. But free-flowing punch and heartfelt speeches could not disguise one fact: All the students at the gathering may have been Asian American, but none of the University staff in attendance were.
As Asian Americans have begun to make their mark in business, medicine and academics, discrimination has become more subtle and increasingly institutionalized. A quiet, backhanded, almost invisible form of prejudice — which demeans Asian Americans with thoughtless insensitivity, slighting disregard and a tenacious "glass ceiling" in employment — now is deeply rooted in American society. And its insidious presence is apparent even here at the University of Kansas.
I wrote the chancellor in 1966 about this apparently systematic exclusion of Asian Americans from University-wide search committees. The chancellor responded that the composition of such bodies was determined not by race, but by the personal accomplishments and experience of potential members. While applauding the chancellor's stand for qualifications above tokenism, I was struck by the implications of his position. Are none of the dozens of Asian-American faculty or hundreds of Asian-American students on this campus really qualified to sit on such prominent committees? Are we Asian Americans at KU truly so unimpressive and untrustworthy?
I suppose we must be because Strong Hall so thoroughly is devoid of Asian-American faces. There are no Asian Americans in the upper ranks of the University bureaucracy and, even in middle management, you can count the Asian-American administrators on the fingers of one hand. None of the deans on the Lawrence campus and no department chairs in CLAS are Asian American. Soberingly, there aren't even any Asian-American administrative staff at the Office of Minority Affairs, the Multicultural Resource Center or the Equal Opportunity Office.
In 1996, the University conducted high-profile job searches for two crucial officials, the Provost and the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. Blue-ribbon search committees of faculty, staff and students were appointed to screen the candidates. Reflecting the diversity of our campus, both committees appropriately included Hispanic and African-American members. Yet strikingly, neither committee included anyone of
Asian descent. No Asian Americans were selected as finalists in these two important searches.
The University is recruiting a new dean of libraries, another pivotal administrative position. Predictably and dishearteningly - this search committee also lacks even a single Asian American member.
What message does all this send to Asian Americans in our community? A hate crime is greeted with incredulity and denial. The University administration talks a good line but consistently slights Asian Americans in major committee appointments. The University officially embraces diversity, yet it has no room for Asian Americans in Strong Hall.
Perhaps Asian Americans, as a "model minority," should just grin and bear it, enduring affronts with silent resignation. But we deserve better, both from the dominant culture and from the powers-that-bat at the University of Kansas. Only by speaking out can we Americans of Asian descent ever hope to gain the understanding and the respect that we so fully deserve.
Tsutsui is an assistant professor of history and a faculty adviser for the Asian American Student Union.
Director's talent ignored in debate about politics
Director Elia Kazan will accept an honorary Oscar, but don't expect one of the usual 10-minute standing ovations. I wouldn't be the least surprised if the Hollywood liberals start hurling rotten tomatoes at the 89-year-old filmmaker.
Sunday's Oscar telecast promises only one genuine moment of drama, but it has nothing to do with which star will take home a trophy.
Kazan has been a persistent thorn in Hollywood's side for decades. In 1952, at the height of Sen. Joseph McCarthy's Communist witchhunts, Kazan named names during testimony before the House Uus-Ameri-
Jeremy Doherty opinion @ kansan.com
can Activities Committee, and his words later led to the blacklisting of eight of his Hollywood colleagues.
Hostility against Kazan persists, even though he extracted career-best performances from Marlon Brando and James Dean, and directed some of the key films of the 1950s, such as On the Waterfront. Kazan's style pushed actors to give more full, more realistic performances, but his enemies will not give Kazan his due. Many of those enemies will be sitting on their hands at the ceremony. And yes, some in the crowd undoubtedly will jeer his name.
Already, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Roger Ebert has said he will observe the clapping and booing with interest come Oscar night.
"I will be doing neither: just watching silently," the critic said in a column published last week. I'm amazed at the wishy-washiness of these words, spoken by someone who prides himself on being opinionated.
Me, I'm not going to straddle the fence or "watch silently" like the ever-civilized Ebert; I am going to cheer for Kazan. I may even toast his health as he collects his richly deserved award.
The question here boils down to whether we ought to separate Kazan's art from his politics.
ought to separate him from members of the Hollywood left, particularly some of the blacklisted writers affected by Kazan's testimony, insist that his art and his politics cannot be separated. They say that Kazan's testimony destroyed careers and lives and that giving him an honorary Oscar — in addition to
Kazan's foes are giving the Oscar folks far too much credit — both for their political savvy and their intelligence.
Their sense of politics is even worse, as evidenced by the stars who spout their lame political causes on the yearly telecast.
Norma Barzman, screenwriter of 1953's Luxury Girls, certainly thinks so and wasted no time blasting Kazan at a Writers Guild of America press conference last week.
Five years ago, Richard Gere commandeered the program and demanded that the billion viewers send telepathic messages of peace and love to Chinese leader Deng Xiaping. The loopy speech was capped with Gere's repeated chant of "Send this thought out, send this thought."
"His lifetime achievement is great films and destroyed lives," the blacklisted writer said to a Variety reporter. "I'm not going to forgive him."
The average member of the voting Academy toils in Hollywood on movies such as *Waterworld* and *Bride of Chucky*. The members' sense of what constitutes an artistically valid film is absurd.
In short, it plainly is stupid to believe that an Oscar for Kazan amounts to disrespect to those harmed by McCarthyism. The Oscars are a racket — a popularity contest that allows the studios to pat themselves on the back for making one another richer. This year, the studio Miramax has spent more than $15 million on its awards campaign for Shakespeare in Love — more than twice what it spent to make Pulp Fiction in 1994.
Such whining. Kazan didn't destroy lives. McCarthyism did. Kazan thought he was doing the right thing in testifying.
Warren Beatty, also speaking at the Writers Guild conference last week, has demonstrated the correct attitude to take regarding Elia Kazan.
the two directing trophies he has collected in the past -- implies an endorsement of those actions
"Ella Kazan taught me more than anyone else about making movies," Beatty said. "He's someone that I love and whose work I respect."
The pointless anger against Kazan already cost him career recognitions from the American Film Institute and the Los Angeles Film Critics Association in recent years. He doesn't need the Oscar Sunday night; his films will be studied and enjoyed for years to come.
But we should not waste this opportunity to pay respect to his talent.
Doherty is an Olathe senior in journalism and was the Kansan movie critic during 1998.