UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN editorials Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the Kansan editorial staff. Signed columns represent the views of only the writers. OCTOBER 10, 1978 Nuclear energy risky A continued growth of nuclear energy in the United States is a gamble that can produce no winners. Billed as a cheap, pollution-free form of energy that can best help the country meet its future energy needs, nuclear energy is a fraud—an extremely dangerous one. The American people are courting certain disaster if the growth of nuclear reactors continues and the nation's nuclear power commitment is not dropped. The risks of the nuclear gamble are too great to chance. MOST PEOPLE, one must assume, are content to hide in the false security of their homes in hope that the radioactive hobgobblens will go away. But they will not, and the cries of antinuclear protesters continue to go unheeded. But public concern over nuclear energy development is disturbingly apathetic. Except for a vocal minority little opposition to nuclear energy has been heard recently. Despite all arguments espousing the so-called benefits of nuclear energy and the need for its development, too much remains unanswered. Even after years of wrestling with the problem, the government still doesn't know how to dispose of radioactive nuclear waste. One waste product, plutonium 329, does not fully decay for 250,000 years. No containers can adequately hold it. So we continue to fill our environment with a substance so deadly that it would take only a handful to destroy life on earth. THE SAFETY of nuclear power plants also should be of great concern. Problems with corrosion, cracks and leaks have been found in at least 20 of the 46 operating nuclear power plants in the United States, according to recent news reports. In addition, the costs of nuclear energy are much greater than its supporters expected. The costs of nuclear energy for each kilowatt are now to be almost four times as much in 1985 as was estimated in 1972. the dangers and problems of nuclear energy are well-established, but they have long been ignored by a government too concerned with economic and energy expediency rather than social and environmental preservation. Other energy alternatives besides nuclear power exist, and they must be developed to stop the spread of America's false energy messiah. The University Daily Kansan welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typewritten, double-spaced and not exceed 500 words. They should include the writer's name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the university of Kansan the writer's class and home town or faculty or staff position. The Kansan reserves the right to edit letters for publication. The strong-armed tactics of bill collectors are legendary: "You've got 24 hours to pay us or your sister's a goner, kid." No matter how overplayed those methods are, they will soon be a thing of the past if the Federal Trade Commission has its way. The FTC is cracking down on bill collection methods. FTC law will civilize bill collectors Although the law does not affect persons or companies that try to collect bills for themselves, it should be effective—if the FTC succeeds—against the real problem causers, the third-party bill collectors. FTC fines for illegal methods can be up to $10,000. Congress passed a law in March for bidding unacquainted methods of bill collection. Those methods often include obtaining a copy of the bill, impeding illegal action, threats of violence, use of false names by collectors, obscene language and repeated phone calls, calls between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. and calls at work by the employer does not allow personal calls. Since the law went into effect, the FTC has received more than 1,000 complaints about collectors who have used illegal methods, an attempt to fair the law hasn't been totally effective. The FTC wants to know how effective the law has been, so it asks consumers to report violations. Consumers who know of those cases are asked to write the FTC in Washington THE ATTEMPTED crackdown is a promising move by the FTC. Of course, dodging bills shouldn't be advocated, but the methods that collection agencies traditionally have used should have been stopped long ago. Letters Policy Lawrence, fortunately, doesn't have much of a problem with all collectors, but she couldn't handle a consumer Affairs Association. She said she had received only one complaint in her campus office since the law took effect. That was turned over to University officials. THE CONSUMER Affairs Association has confirmed it follows when a complaint is filed. Kroger said she first called the collection agency and talked with agency officials. If a solution is not found, the problem is referred to the department under law enforcement offices or the FTC. Consumer Affairs handles more problems with individuals who collect bills than with actions by collection agencies. But the problems that occur when individuals try to collect bills are usually not harassing telephone calls or other illegal collection methods. Rather, problems arise because of the fact that customers or why they're being charged late fees. Kroger said she usually talked with the customer and the person trying to collect money when there was such a misunderstanding. THESE COMPANIES that try to collect bills by themselves, called "direct collectors" by the FTC, aren't affected by the new law that restricts law affords only "third-party collectors." The FTC originally wanted the direct collectors included in the law, but compromised to get the bill passed. The logic behind a law affecting only third-party collectors, Congress said, was that most businesses would not subject their customers to the same tactics collection agencies use. tactics are still had no matter what type of collector uses them. However, the narrowness of the law won't stop the FTC in its drive to stomp out illegal methods. The agency has vowed to investigate the direct collectors' methods also, to see whether they violate any other laws for bidding deceptive trade practices. Consumers, of course, still will have to put up with some companies that violate the law. Some collection agencies still will be forced to stock foods that frighten people and give away it with But it's reassuring to know that the FTC is at least attempting to do away with archaic Exhibit coverage shows need for thoughtful journalism BvSTEVE FRAZIER Kansan Editor Each semester's editor of the University Daily Kansan inherits only the skeleton of a newspaper: a list of names to mold into a staff, a printing contract, an outline of typography specifications, a hope that the business staff will sell ads, some typewriters and a coffee pot. The new editor then flushes to skeleton into the type of newspaper he thinks it should be—within the same range as most newspapers. But grawing away at that backbone of tradition is an accumulation of distrust, suspicion and criticism based on years of alleged impropieties by the Kansan. After my few weeks as editor I'm finding that the only real backbone of this newspaper is its past. For the most part that's good, because there is a reservoir of respect—or at least understandable—for the Kansan throughout the University. And sometimes it seems as if the only way the next day's paper gets printed is the momentum of 65 years of daily publication. Consider this quotation, which 1 inherited along with that skeleton of a newspaper: "THE FAULTY investigative methods of the Kansan, the presumptive reasoning, the suppression of contrary opinion, the misinformation, the refusal of both students and faculty to discuss the issue with concerned colleagues, and above all their apparent inability to comprehend the seriousness of the issue, its social context and to take responsibility for the slander and psychological damage created, raises substantial questions as to the educational soundness of the School of Journalism. "This question is further emphasized by past Kansan racist slanders and mimetisations against other minorities and past manipulation and suppression of opinion and news with regard to other minorities." Forer was referring to the Kansan's reporting and comment on the University's decision in April to postpone the opening of a display of Nazi art and memorabilia at Spencer Research Library. That quotation is from a letter sent this May by Mary Forster, associate professor of social welfare, to Donald Noyes, chief counsel to Dept. of Labor. POLDER WENT ON to write, "The classic anti-Semitic stereotype initiated, enlarged, given palpable form, rationalized and protected by the Holocaust, and presented to temporary subjects an ennoblement to violence against Jews. "The Kanas manufactured the same simplistic logic through which more than half of the world's Jewish population . . . were delivered to the most agonizing desecration of the human spirit in mankind's history. That is the source of our moral outrage." Nearly six months have passed since University Exploration of how Forer came to write such criticism of the Kansan has been for me a valuable lesson in this newspaper's responsibility to its people. The Kansan doctors their rights have been violated by the Kansan. And an explanation of the Kansan's coverage of the closing of the exhibit also will be, I hope, a valuable lesson for our readers-friends and critics alike—who often question why. and how, we do what we do. administrators, following a hasty-called meeting, postponed the opening of the Nard exhibit. THE KANSEN of April 21 reported on the previous day's decision: "The administrators said they were not under any pressure from anyone to cancel the exhibit. However, Shankel said he had received many phone calls from persons concerned about the timing of the showing and the pain that it might cause persons who viewed the display. "We canceled the exhibit out of concern for our Jewish students and colleagues," he said. The controversy over the exhibit that swirled in the waived days of the spring semester was not died: waning days in use * Forer and Carl Leban, associate professor of East Asian languages and cultures, are requesting another statement clarifying the administration's reasons for postponing the exhibit, Shankel has said. * Leban says the Association of American University Professors is exploring the questions of academic freedom raised by the exhibit's closing. - Leban has written each Kansas legislator calling for an enactment of a group libel law in Kansas so that criminal penalties can be applied to "irresponsible journalists with unrestrained freedom to defame groups in their area" and are needed for their protection. Leban cities the Kansen and the Lawrence-World coverage of the exhibit closing. - And a group that includes Clarence Dillingham, acting director of affirmative action; Robert Shelton, associate professor of religious studies; David Katzman, associate professor of history; representatives from the Jewish community in Kansas over the paper's alleged creation of a Jewish pressure group that forced the exhibit's closing. Already, the Kanasa has been formally censured by the University Senate for "the blatantly anti-Semitic cartoon which appeared in the University Daily Kanasa of 24 April 1978. We condemn as well those University Daily Kanansa editorial policies which have worked in the service of intolerance and racism to divide rather than promote understanding in our community." MEMBERS OF THAT group have mentioned public protests and a class action lawsuit against the School of Journalism as possible remedies for the Kansan's alleged anti-Semitism. But, with the benefit of hindsight and careful consideration of the arguments of those who call the Kansan "racist," I can see the need for correct apparently false impressions left by a Kansan editorial cartoon and an editorial. And—like all Kansan editors I have known—I recognize the need to ensure that our editors and reporters guard against "intolerance and racism." I was not on the spring Kansan staff, but I can find no evidence that there were any editorial policies that promoted "intolerance and racism." Since I first read The New Yorker in 1970, I have never encountered any such policies. ON APRIL 21 the Kansas published an editorial cartoon that showed a hook-nosed young man, apparently drawn to represent a stereotyped Jew, walk-along figure that represented the University administration. Those who have criticized the Kansan for publishing that cartoon say it promotes the racial notion that white people are superior to black people. torial underhanded pressure and controlling group, seeking to trample and destroy majority rights." That same basic criticism is leveled against that day's unsigned editorial, which says, "Those who crusaded against the exhibit, mostly Jewish, reportedly found the timing offensive and distasteful." (The exhibit was to have opened the day before Passover, at the end of a television series on the Holocaust.) I cannot, in good conscience, deny that the cartoon was potentially offensive. I can find no evidence that any Jews called administrators the morning the exhibit was postponed to request that it be closed. THE KANANS' critics, however, contend that the editorial and cartoon were published by Kanans editors made the racist assumption that Jews tend to form pressure groups. I can find no evidence that Kanans editors were motivated by anti-Semitism. Nor can I find evidence of suppression of news or As has been indicated in the quotation from the April 21 Kansan news story, the Kansan, in its news columns, never reported there was a Jewish pressure group. The Kansen news columns quoted administration sources who explained their reasons for postponement of the press conference statement that there was no specific pressure. Then why the statement in the editorial that Jews crushed against the exhibit? Burz Rosebier, the spring editor, wrote in response to the University Senate's censure that "Our reports were that most protesters were Jewish." According to Rosebier, administration sources told Kansan staffers that Jews protested against the exhibit. Still, the Kansan printed no such statements in its news columns, quoting only sources who allowed their names to be attached to their statements. KANSAN CRITICS, however, say that the Kanans should have dug deeper. Then, the Kanans would have printed earlier what now appears to be the clearest picture: that administrators received a flood of calls April 20 from reporters responding to a story on the exhibit that ran in the Kansas City Times and that only a few Jews—none of whom requested cancellation—called in reference to the exhibit. Without first-hand knowledge of each editorial decision made by the staff staff, I am unqualified to judge whether any one of those decisions was proper or improper. I would suggest, however, that whatever inadequacies existed in the Kansan's comment and coverage occurred because of the inherent problems in reporting on fast-breaking, emotion-packed news. Even in the thick of the controversy, editorial writer John Mitchell touched on the problem of such reporting when he tried to retrace the events of April 20. "No administrator yet has answered some fundamental questions about what led to the cancellation." Mitchell wrote in a column published April 28. "How many phone calls and complaints did Strong Hail receive that morning? . . . Were all of it that good?" The answer is that it took or-how little - to move administrators. LATER, SOME of Mitchell's questions would be answered by the administrators May 2 "clarification" of reasons for cancellation for the exhibit, by the Kansan's reporting of that "clarification" and by letters printed on the Kansan's editorial page that were critical of its coverage. The nature of news is that not all questions will be answered to everyone's satisfaction at one—if ever. As much as the Kansan may have angered members of the University community, and as harsh as their criticism has been, the entire affair, unfortunately, seems typical of the sort of criticism the Kansan and other newspapers get when they provide timely information on controversial stories that involve minorities, religions or special interest groups. The Kansan's coverage of the Nazi decision decision serves here only as the most pertinent, and I, hope, to provide a broader context. DILLINGHAM, for example, recently traced for me the history of the Kansan's often-poor relations with campus blacks. Black groups apparently have tied together instances of allegedly inadequate coverage and concluded that the Kansan is preduced in its coverage of minorities, he said. The newly revived Black Student Union, for example, has received money from the Student Senate to start its own newspaper. ISU represented Kaana coverage of campus blacks was unadvertised. Again, although I find no evidence of Kansian bias against blacks over the semesters—and certainly no semester-to-semester transfer of anti-black editorial bias—I find that the data are complete and balanced reporting of all minorities. Similarly, however, we in the newsroom see the need for better coverage in almost every area of news. But unlike groups who view the Kansas only in the light of their interests, we must consider the need to bring the entire University community and distribute our reporting staff and newspaper accordingly. OUR READERS will almost certainly disagree with some of our decisions on how we allocate our efforts and news columns—just as there are conflicts within the staff on editorial decisions. This semester alone, complaints about the Kansan's coverage of Jews, blacks, women and foreign students have encouraged us to more closely examine our policies. We urge our judgment of the validity of particular complaints. All of this, believe it or not, is about how I think the process should work: The Kansan reports and comments on events. Readers, if they disagree, complain; editors responsible for the Kansan's content listen and carefully consider those complaints. I remain unconvinced that the Kanas has been intentionally prejudicial in its coverage of minorities or any group. But, like any who try to produce the best possible newspaper, this fall's staff will continue to be concerned that bias—or the appearance of bias—can erode the Kanas' credibility. THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN A Pacemaker award winner Kansan Telephone Numbers Newsroom—864-4819 Business Office—864-4358 Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May and Monday through Thursday during June and July except Saturday, and Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas 60415. Subscriptions by mail are $1 for first-order or $2 for a year in Douglas County. For orders outside the United States, a $2 are学费, the student activity fee. Editor Steve Frazier Managing Editor Warry Bass Campaign Editor Associate Campus Editor Associate Campus Editor Sports Editor Manning Editor Manning Editor Photo Editor Makeup Editors Editorial Writers Steve Franier Editorial Editor Barry Grey Dan Brown Dan Brown Direk Stetmir, Pam Mannon Leon Unrhub Nandi Nandi Mary Thompson Mary Thompson Kidion Eloy Laurie Daniel, Caret Hunter, Paula Schwartz Pam Keeley, Mary Thomson Pam Keeley, Mary Thomson Rick Ahn, Alain Houdel Rick Ahn, Alain Houdel Bruce Bandile, Trish Luke, Adam Stone Bob Bae, Bob Bae, Adam Stone Linda Word, Miki Gray Business Manager Don Green Don Green Associate Business Manager Karen Wendlerz Assistant Business Manager Bret Miller Promotions Manager Matt Harty Promotion Managers Mel Smith, Alen Blair, Tom Whittaker Advertising Manager Jeff Kiou National Advertising Manager Jeff Kiou Classified Manager Leslie Chandler Assistant Classified Manager Ann Hendrickson Photographer Phat Hunter Artist Steve Folem, Liz Rothstein General Manager Advertiser Advising General Manager Advertiser Advisory general Manager Rick Musser