4
Thursday, November 12, 1987 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Ticket takers
Today at 12:01 a.m., the Jayhawk Bookstore became one of the first businesses in the state to sell lottery tickets.
Kind of ironic. isn't it'
A business that thrives on sales of textbooks and school supplies will be peddling lottery tickets now - mostly to students. Yet, part of the revenue from lottery sales is designated for education in Kansas.
It is a ludicrous cycle with a ludicrous rationale.
So some of the money will go from students' shallow pockets and then back to them in the form of financial aid and other pressing needs, right?
Hardly. If the Kansas Lottery turns out to be anything like Missouri's, which was touted to be a primary source of revenue for education, the benefits will be a long time coming.
Certainly it will be argued that students are mature enough to make their own decisions about purchasing lottery tickets. But if retailers are making only 5 percent commission on the tickets, which is quickly eaten by advertising and other costs, why present the temptation? Past experience shows that the lottery hurts those who can least afford the pain.
Maybe students will wise up and refuse to try for that one-in-a-million jackpot. Then maybe the people of Kansas will wise up and realize they are only taxing themselves.
Until then, the lottery remains big business for those it employs, for the state and for the few who win. Can students afford to be part of the big losers who support it?
Stepping down
It is the end of an era.
What a relief. Jerry Falwell has resigned as president of the Moral Majority. He has also left his job as "rescuer" of the ill-fated PTL ministry.
By concentrating his efforts on the pulpit of his own church and on the host's chair of his own television show, Falwell, the man in charge of the religious right in the United States, will step out of the spotlight. Indeed, the religious right can take care of itself.
Falwell first became known in political circles and by religious groups when he combined religion and politics through the Moral Majority. Later, as other famous religious leaders in this country fell out of their followers' favor because of outlandish demands or steamy scandal, Falwell gathered the pieces of their ministries.
For many years now, Falwell has occupied a position that has been both controversial and influential.
It is a relief to see a highly visible leader voluntarily step down from his pedestal. We have suffered from too many falls in this country lately, in both the religious and political realms. Perhaps Falwell sensed that any perch becomes more vulnerable as its power expands.
If the scandals of the past year have taught those in the spotlight to be cautious and aware of the frailty of public approval, then those who fell did not fall in vain.
Seeing stars
A study released this month indicated that near-sighted people are more intelligent than their 20/20 counterparts.
Wouldn't it also mean that those with clear vision — visionsaries, that is — are unable to see reality clearly?
Or maybe that means, that nearsighted people are limited to reading things that are close to them, such as books. That explains their intelligence.
Or maybe myopic people, identified by researchers as the ones with glasses, were best able to read the examination and score high. Those with vision problems who didn't wear glasses resolved to squint and guess correct responses on the exam.
Or maybe those with glasses could read the writing on the wall and perform well on the researchers' exam. For that matter, maybe their eyesight allowed them to read between the lines.
Those with good vision could only read it and weep.
Editorials in this column are the opinions of the editorial board.
News staff
Jennifer Benjamin ... Editor
Juli Warren ... Managing editor
John Benner ... News editor
Beth Copeland ... Editorial editor
Sally Streff ... Campus editor
Brian Keblerine ... Sports editor
Din Ruxellmann ... Photo editor
Bill Skeet ... Graphics editor
Tom Eblen ... General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Bonnie J. Hardy ... Business manager
Robert Hughes ... Advertising manager
Kelly Scherer ... Retail sales manager
Kurt Messeramith ... Campus sales manager
Greg Knipp ... Production manager
David Dennett ... National sales manager
Angela Clark ... Classifier
Ron Weems ... Director of marketing
Jeanne Hines ... Sales and marketing adviser
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and less than 200 words and must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University of Kansas, please include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
Guest shots should be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
The Kansas reserves the right to reject or edit letters and guest shots. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansas State University 111 Sullivan Fell Hall.
the necessity reflect the views of the University Daily Kansan. Editors are the opinion of the Kanasan editorial board.
The University Daily Kansan (USP5 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Stairwater Flint Hall, Lawen, Kan. 6045, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and final periods, and Wednesday during the summer session. Second-class postage is paid in county and $50 outside the County. Student subscriptions are $40 in Douglas County and $50 outside the County. Student subscriptions are $24 and are paid through the student activity fee.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the University Daily Kansan, 118 Staufer-Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 66045.
"JUDGE WAPNER, HAS IT OCCURRED TO YOU THAT THE PRESIDENT MAY BE USING YOU TO PROVOKE THIS COMMITTEE?"
Media disclaim Ginsburg's fall
By CAROLYN SKORNECK
The Associated Press
The media inflicted the death of a thousand cuts on Douglas H. Ginsburg's nomination to the Supreme Court, a conservative group says, but journalists contend the press treated Ginsburg fairly.
The media tended to focus on things about Ginsburg that were tangential at best because he lacked the extensive paper trail of judicial opinions and writings that Robert H. Bork, the previous nominee, had possessed, said Daniel L. Casey, executive director of the American Conservative Union. The Senate rejected Bork's nomination.
Ginsburg, whose admission that he smoked marijuana in the 1960s and 1970s prompted some senators and administration officials to drop their support of him, is the third figure in the past six months whose hopes for higher office have been dashed after revelations in the press.
Gary Hart ended his presidential campaign in May amid reports that he spent time with Florida model Donna Rice. Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del, quit the presidential race in September after disclosures that he borrowed sections of his stump speeches without crediting the original speakers and misstated his academic record.
Ginsburg's admission of marijuana use came as Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio was about to report it.
Totenberg recently said in an interview that the drug use was going to be part of a larger story about Ginsburg at Harvard.
"But after I put an inquiry in at the Justice Department, it became clear that the story wouldn't hold and I had to go with it right away," she said.
"It seems to me it was basically his
Analysis
own supporters who deserted him and not the media or anybody else who did anything to him, 'she said.
Ginsburg had faced other unmeriting news stories. The Associated Press reported that Ginsburg directed a Justice Department case on cable television while holding a $139,000 investment in a cable company. The Wilmington (Del.) News Journal reported that Ginsburg's physician wife, Hallee Morgan, had performed abortions in the late 1970s, before the couple married, when she was a resident in obstetrics and gynecology in Boston.
Newspaper editors contacted by telephone contended that Ginsburg simply got the same scrutiny that has been applied to other Supreme Court nominees, and some blamed the Reagan administration for the nomination's demise.
George J. Coltiar, managing editor of the Los Angeles Times, said federal officials should have done complete background checks on Ginsburg when he was working for the Justice Department, when he was nominated to be a federal Court of Appeals judge a year ago and before his Supreme Court nomination.
James Naughton, deputy managing editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer, said, "It strikes me that what the newspapers and television and radio did in this case was what the FBI had done to do. It inflicted had failed to do, which was to round out the portrait of Ginsburg in its entirety."
Those views were echoed by a man who usually is an outspoken critic of the news media — Reed Irvine, the leader of Accuracy In Media.
"I think the media did what the
Douglas Ginsburg
FBI and the Justice Department should have done and did a better job of it," Irvine said. "I'm sure that Judge Ginsburg thinks that (his treatment by the media) was unfair, but when someone presents himself for a high position, he has to expect that his background is going to be thoroughly scrutinized."
W. Stephen Cannon, an informal spokesman for Ginsburg, and Justice Department spokesman Terry East did not respond to calls to their homes.
The abortion story concerned several of the editors contacted.
"I worried a great deal about the story about his wife being involved in abortions," said Tim J. MeGuire, managing editor of the Star Tribune in Minneapolis. "I think when you start talking about a wife's activities prior to marriage, or even a wife's activities, you're on very dangerous ground."
J. Donald Brandt, editor of the Wilmington News Journal,
responded: "I think the story was justified, but you might be interested to know that our editorial board wrote an editorial the next day saying it was irrelevant."
The editors denied that they had set out to bring down Ginsburg's nomination.
"I don't think we were out to get him," said Leonard Downie, managing editor of the Washington Post. "The reporting that was going on here and elsewhere was similar to the in-depth biographical research that's been done on presidential candidates."
"A straightforward report that he acknowledged that he had once used marijuana is something . . . that has to be reported. And once somebody gives you the hot potato, I think you have an obligation to ask the question," said Burl Olborne, president editor of the Dallas Morning News.
Some of the editors said the media had little to do with the nomination's sale.
"I'm not sure the media played that important a role," said Glenn McCutchen, managing editor of the Atlanta Constitution.
Cotlari added: "I think that our role was minimal at best. I think that some Harvard Law School professors conveyed to NPR, or to whomever, the information about his smoking marijuana. They could just as easily have called some conservative senators and accomplished the same thing. I think our role, at most, is that of a messenger."
McGuire commented: "There are a lot of people, including newspaper editors, who would not have thought that the discovery of smoking marijuana a few years ago would have brought down a Supreme Court nominee."
Disservice to Don
I must respond to your editorial titled "No friend to Buddy," which appeared in the Oct. 30 Kansan. This editorial is a callous and unjustified criticism of Don Johnson's selection as the first recipient of the Buddy Award.
The author of the editorial demonstrates a profound ignorance of the subject, and, consequently, his writing is full of misquided, shallow and petty opinions. Don Johnson has an Emmy nomination and a host of other critical awards to his credit, and the depth and quality of Johnson's film and television work have well established his credentials as a skilled and talented actor with a wealth of experience behind him and a bright future ahead of him. He most certainly deserved his Buddy Award.
As a KU graduate, I was appalled by the writer's ferocious attack on Don Johnson. This
editorial does not reflect the views of students and friends of the University who attended the Buddy Award ceremonies Oct. 24. Don Johnson accepted his award with style, grace and sincere gratitude. The audience responded with warmth and enthusiasm. It was a wonderful evening full of pride and celebration for Charles "Buddy" Rogers, after whom the award was named, and for everyone involved with the award. When he was here, Don Johnson offered to return to KU to share with students the insights and expertise he has gained from his experience as a professional actor. This will be invaluable in helping to prepare students in the theatre and media arts department for professional careers.
I do not see any cause for controversy in all of this, and I cannot understand the writer's cruel attempt to destroy the good feelings that have resulted from the award. I challenge the author of this editorial to say those same words to Don Johnson face to face, instead of waiting until a week after he was gone to publish this vindictive diatribe. The University Daily Kansan, and especially the author of this editorial, owe more than they can repay for the damage they have done, but a sincere public apology to all concerned would seem to be a good place to start.
Mark C. Syverson executive secretary of the Kansas Film Institute
There is one statistic that should convince any good faculty member and all students that it would not be desirable to have the NEA representing KU faculty: Since 1983, this country has funneled about 650 billion additional dollars into public, often NEA-dominated, educational systems. Only about one percent of that has been used to improve the quality of education via educational reforms.
Thus, we the NEA to represent the faculty of this institution we might expect; students forced to pay more for the same or lesser quality education; "featherbedding" of faculty positions; opposition to means by which the quality of education could be improved; and the development of antagonistic relationship between state and University officials and faculty.
Educational threat
Given that the U.S. already puts more money, as a percent of the GNP, into often NEA-dominated public educational systems than other nations showing superior results, and given the growing importance of education in our modern world, it must be concluded that the NEA poses one of the greatest threats to the future of this nation. We have an obligation to see that this threat does not extend itself to the University of Kansas.
Maynard W. Shell, professor of psychology
BLOOM COUNTY
by Berke Breathed
4