Unwelcome criticism
To the authors of the letter below concerning the role of the student newspaper (we assume that's what it concerns):
We hereby stand rapped in the mouth, but not for our mistakes. In fact, we would like to know what for. What makes us think anyone is interested in our mistakes is the number of valid criticisms we get, of which yours is certainly not one.
Our Friday editorial was neither back-pat nor apology. Had it been one of these, we could only expect letters like yours. It was, on the other hand, an attempt at explaining some of the circumstances under which a student newspaper must operate, in hopes of promoting a better understanding between paper and readers.
At no point did we contend that the paper is vital and necessary to the existence of the campus, nor did we attempt to justify its existence. No doubt the university would remain intact without the Kansan, without the graduate school or the Chi Omega fountain, or any one of its elements. But we said that the paper is a learning situation, as is your master's thesis, the Law Review and other exponents of the various programs within the university. And, whether or
The Editors
not you question its value on any other plane, we do learn from it.
As far as training journalists for another world, we wonder what the justification is for any of the university learning situations if not to prepare chemists, lawyers, teachers, engineers, journalists (choose one) for their careers, presumably somewhere other than within the university.
But if you don't think so, we'd like you to tell us why instead of handing us an irrelevant, sarcastic discourse on nothing in particular. We improve when our shortcomings are pointed out to us, as many qualified critics have done. Otherwise, read your cast iron Jayhawk instead of an evening paper.
We think the Kansan contributes to the living community in the same manner as a city paper contributes to and reflects that city, though perhaps not to the same degree as many of those papers. And we like to think that the Kansan is at least of some influence here. Furthermore, we feel that the Kansan is a better paper this year than in years past, and that it will continue to improve.
The people say...
Dear Sirs:
After having read the article in Thursday's edition on the beauty salon incident, I thought that it might be wise for me to inform the students of the position that HRC is taking on this incident, for although, I am certain, it was not the intent of the reporter, it might appear to some that we are out to cause trouble for all of the beauty shops in Lawrence.
This is not our intent; we have no desire to hurt anyone's business. Rather, we are seeking an interpretation and implementation of the Kansas Civil Rights Act of 1955.
UNDER THE ACT, it is against the law for any place of public accommodation, which includes beauty salons, to discriminate "directly or indirectly" on the basis of race, color, creed, national origin or ancestry.
Yet under the existing laws of Kansas, there are two separate schools of cosmetology, one which trains operators to work on Anglo-Saxon hair, and another which trains operators to work on Negro hair. Although there is now some training given to operators in both schools, to be licensed, an operator, unlike a barber, does not have to be proficient at working on both types of hair.
Thus beauty salons may, if
they desire, hire operators who are trained only to do Anglo-Saxon hair; the operators then being untrained to work on Negro hair, may legitimately claim that by refusing to work on Negro hair, they are not discriminating; they just do not want to go beyond their experience.
This is an understandable and logical argument, and it is for this reason that we do not wish to hurt anyone's business, for beauty salons are merely victims, willingly or unwillingly, of existing ambiguities, contradictions, and loopholes in legislation.
HRC FEELS that such loopholes should not exist, for how does one determine when lack of training ends, and discrimination begins? Our position is that having no operators trained to work on Negro hair is an indirect form of discrimination on the part of beauty salons.
What we seek from the state is a decision that beauty salons, as they are in the business of serving the public, must be prepared to serve the entire public. Possibly this will require a merging of the two schools of cosmetology.
Whatever it takes, we say, "Let it be done." There is no sense in having a Civil Rights Act, if it is impossible to implement it. The
problem exists in Topeka, not in a local beauty salon.
- Carl Struby
Chairman, HRC
1734 Engel Road
UN 4-4013
To the editors:
Just finished reading your editorial on student newspapers. What was it, an apology or a pat on the back? In either case, it would seem to be a waste of valuable news space.
What makes you think we're interested in the mistakes of your novice staff or in the lack of its continuity? This is a tough world. Most of us end up getting wrapped in the mouth for our mistakes.
Was it a pat on the back? It was undeserved. The Kansas is characterized by its total lack of distinction. It is about as vital and necessary to the existence of this campus and what goes on here as Comanche.
If its excuse for existence is the training of journalists for some other world, it is of no consequence to the university as a living community. If its justification lies somewhere, it would seem from this perspective that the paper has missed the mark.
LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS
Neither "sensational rag" nor "conservative pillar." Neither fish nor fowl. Neither here nor there. To the university community about as influential as a cast iron Jayhawk.
"HENDERSON HASN'T ADJUSTED TOO WELL AT HAVING TO TEACH FOUR SECTIONS OF REMEDIAL ENGLISH."
Herman R. Bonett
Lawrence graduate student
Randy Oestreicher
Cambridge, N.Y., graduate
student and friends.
Herman R. Bonett
Official Bulletin
KU VIet Nam Committee Open Meeting, 7:30 p.m. Viet Nam Referendum; education programs. Sunflower Branch: Union.
Linguistics Colloquium, p.m.
Speaker Dale Kinkade, Topic—On
the Identification of Methows, 306
Balcuoy, Kansas Union
TODAY
Danforth Devotion, 4:30 p.m. Sponsored by Lutherans at Danforth
TOMORROW
Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship,
7 p.m. Lecture by Paul Steward.
9 p.m. Reception and Applying
this Bible, " Meadowlark Room, Union,
Carilion Recruitment, 7 p.m. Albert
Classical Film Series, 7 & 9 p.m.
"Orchestra," Dyce Aud.
KU-Y Ski Club. 7:30 p.m. Films and
video clips help information. Forum
Room. Uniforms.
2
Daily Kansan
editorial name
Tuesday, October 18, 1766
DECLARATION!
(The opinions expressed in this column are not necessarily those of the editors.)
A Kansas politician recently accused his opponent of being "a man who lacks the courage to take a stand." In that same speech this Kansas inaugurated a new era of neo-isolationism by declaring, "we don't want outsiders coming in and telling the people of Kansas how to run their state."
In the heat of the political battle statements like this are rather frequently made, and, we might add, unfortunately effective. Today, therefore, we want to take a candid look at the ones to blame for this present state of political affairs, the controlling force in our democratic system—the people.
EVERYONE STILL LOVES a circus. You have only to take a drive through Lawrence to see this. Look around and you will see that the really "good" politicians are slaves to catchy slogans, eyeful colors, and oversimplified issues. A couple of weeks ago the Docking fans threw a big party at the local fairgrounds. Last Saturday the Avery boys invaded the football game. Governors, it appears, are made of food, booze, and show.
Unfortunately these typical political campaigns major in the minors because simple voters want simple issues. The men who are actually involved in government probably understand complexity, but, after all, when you go politicking, you have to "give 'em what they want to hear." (However, this can be overdone. Therefore, the really "good" politician realizes that he must have at least one, unemotional, minority position to "prove" he has those old stand-by vote-getters: integrity, conscience, and principle.)
For instance let's look at a specific example. The Democrat forces have been playing up two things which disturb Mr. Dockat: the taxes and the antiquated Kansas constitution. The strategy here is really great! The anti-tax stand mobilizes the negative element of the voters and the proposal of a Constitution Revision Commission pacifies those who want positive action.
SUPERFICIALLY the banker from Arkansas City has a good case. Most people think it sounds good, and in politics what is lies buried under what is thought to be.
Notice, however, how these two issues have been designed for show. Without the taxes about which Mr. Docking has been gripping, and without an occasional increase in those taxes, the state's expenditures could not be met. Surely our banker friend knows something about balancing the books. And so, if he succeeds in cutting taxes, this candidate will need to cut expenditures. What programs would he cut? Obviously to offset a significant tax reduction, he will have to cut significant state programs. The choice then confronting Mr. Docking and the people of Kansas would be worse schools, worse highways, a worse mental health program, or a terrible penal system. This choice is necessary because these are major programs which are presently being financed by the 8 per cent of your tax dollar which goes to Topeka. Which will the challenger delete? That is a tough question. It is one which neither voter nor candidate wishes to discuss. Ignoring it during the campaign does not, however, make it go away.
On the positive side Mr. Docking says, "Let's get a new Constitution." Bravo! Gee Whiz! Golly! Wow! And why does Mr. Docking want a new Constitution? The only two things he keeps emphasizing are the provision against dueling by political candidates and the provision for the use of money paid to avoid conscription to help pay for education. While the anti-dueling clause restricts individual liberty (and, for all we know, maybe Mr. Docking wants to have a duel with Gov. Avery) and some other use might be made of the non-existent funds from draft dodgers, this hardly seems sufficient reason to change the entire Constitution. Perhaps Mr. Docking has more intelligent reasons for wanting the change, but if he does, they are well-kept secrets.
WHY DO "THE OTHER REASONS" remain well-kept secrets? Simply because the people don't care to know the truth. Because the people don't want to think about dull constitutions. Dueling and military payoff are funny and entertaining. The people eat it up. And Mr. Docking is more than willing to dish it out.
But if you agree we have a circus now, just wait. Last week the U.S. Senate passed a rider which might well result in another $25 million going to each of the major parties' coffers. With enough money the two political parties may become Barnum and Bailey's biggest competitors.
- Pyrrhus and Cineus
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
The Daily Kansan, student newspaper at The University of Kansas, is represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50 St., New York, N.Y. 10622. Matt subscription rates: $4 a semester or $7 a year. Published and second class papers paid at Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year. Sept. Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays and examination periods. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised in the University Daily Kansan are offered to all students without regard to color, creed or national origin.
annual column whose names expressed in the editorial column are those of the students whose names are signed to them. Guest editorial views are not necessarily the editor's. Any opinions expressed in the Daily Kansan are not necessarily those or The University of Kansas Administration or the State Board of Regents.