THE SUMMER SESSION KANSAN editorials Unsigned editors represent the opinion of the Kansan editorial staff. Signed columns represent the views of only the writers. Quality, not quantity JUNE 25,1979 After the official enrollment count is released following the 20th day of classes each semester, the KU administration has breathed a sigh of relief. The number of students at the University of Kansas has become stable, but not dropped. For the sakes of administrators and non-tenured faculty members, it is hoped that KU's enrollment will not drop. However, the semester certainly will come when enrollment figures are lower than the previous semester's figures. How KU will deal with declining enrollment should be at the top of the administration's priority list. Will the University admit and keep students who might have been admitted, but not kept, a decade ago? Let us hope not. Unfortunately, there are signs that the quality of students at KU today is lower than it was 10 years ago. The English department has been forced to begin a remedial course in writing. The chemistry department complains it has students enrolled in basic courses who do not know the simplest equations. And professional schools are deluged each year with students who did not get a basic education somewhere along the way. Regardless of where the blame lies, KU is stuck with students who are barely making it. And the number of this type of student will increase if the University allows it. It is easy for colleges to place the blame on high schools for the decline in the quality of education. It, too, is just as easy for high schools to blame grade schools and for grade schools to blame parents who allow their children to watch hours of television each day. The administration's concern when recruiting students should not merely be that the student has a body which will help enrolment figures. Rather, the administration should concern itself with the minds within those all-important bodies. The University of Kansas can still be one of the best without being the biggest. Journalists uncertain about libel decision By PAUL JESS Guest Writer The nation's editorial writers, editorial cartoonists and other spokesmen for the press of America reacted in predictable fashion two months ago to a Supreme Court decision in the case Herbert v. Lando. The case, which was a mixture of surprise and horror. Depending upon one's point of view, horror may have been called for, but surprise was not. Both the make up of the current Supreme Court (some wags are calling it the Nixonburger Court) and the development of the law of libel asserted by the Court, "warned a reasonably prudent editor" of the danger. In the decision, the Court ruled that the First Amendment does not immunize a journalist from answering questions that challenge the state of mind during the editorial process. The case involved a plaintiff in a libel case, a retired Army officer named Anthony Herbert, who was trying to gather evidence for his case in what is called the pre-trial discovery process. Because he was a public figure, Herbert was required to prove actual Tando on the part of the defendant, Barry Tando, producer of the CBS program, "90 Minutes." THIS ACTUAL MALICE burden has been defined by the Court as clear and convincing evidence that the defendant knew the material was false or was subjectively wrong. In the case would turn on his ability to show that Lando had acted with actual malice, Herbert sought answers to literally hundreds of questions from the defendant. Lando answered all of the questions except those that involved the state of mind during the editorial process. The editorial writers reacted like die-hard baseball fans do when the Rules Committee makes a change that That's the end of the rule. The League Supreme Court had hard reaction to such things as designated hitters. Thus did the press react. (Except, of a National League Supreme Court.) Referring to the newsroom-search decision of last year, Zurcher v. Stanford Daily, Al Neuchatl of Gannett and the American Newspaper Publisher's Assn. said, "Last year the Court allowed the office to omitmage through our desks. Now they're allowing us to omitmage through our minds." And his one of the more temperate remarks. JUST HOW far-reaching, important and 'anti-press' was the decision? A quick history lesson in libel law may help answer those questions. In 1964, in the landmark case New York Times v. Sullivan, the Court in effect nationalized the law of libel for what we now call public plaintiffs by creating the actual malice test referred to earlier. At that time the Court declared it necessary knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard on the part of the publisher defendant. Later that year the Court defined reckless disregard to mean something much more than simple negligence. To show reckless disregard, the Court said that the defendant knew of awareness of probable fault." THE PRESS WAS generally in favor of the actual malice rule. For 15 years public plaintiffs have been having a difficult time with the rule, and it has been required to prove with clear and convincing evidence that the material published about them was defamatory and published either with knowledge of its falsity or willful disregard or probably willfully fraudulent. In Herbert v. Lando the Court was faced with a difficult choice. (Remember the saying, "Hard cases make bad law")7 the justices could either rule that the plaintiff was entitled to ask state-of-mind questions in a first Amendment provision an immunity from such questions. If they rulied for the plaintiff, as they did, the press would see the decision as just another Burger Court, antipress decision. If they rulied for Lando, in the final analysis they would be nullifying libel suits by public plaintiffs. After all, can the courts tell the jury whether it probably falsity if not allowed to get answers to state-of-mind questions? A MIDDLE GROUND does exist, but only Mr. Justice Brennan wished to take it. (The press is still grumbling about what is seen in his "wisth-washy" opinion. He was supposed to be the best friend of the press on Monday.) He did not mind questions unless the trial court judge first held that the words themselves were obviously defamatory. Journalists worry about the decision. Their worry may be well founded. The present Court has few press friends. But the feared "chilling effect" on reporting will probably come more from media over reaction to the decision than from any real issues. It is likely that the worry of the chilling effect may turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even though the Brennan position was not accepted by the majority, media lawyers will undoubtedly push that view in trial cases. The court's decision lower court indictes to take that approach. THE SUMMER session KANSAN THE SUMMER SESSION (USPS 80-640) Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May. USPS 80-710 (USPS 80-710) except weekend, and Sunday and holidays. Second-call postage paid at Lawrence, KS $1 for six months or $2 a year in Douglas County and $1 for six months or $3 a year county. State subscriptions are $2 a semester, passed through the student activity desk. Send changes of address to the University Daily Kansan, Flint Hall. The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 86045 Editor Caroline Trowhridge Caroline Trowborage Campus Editor Bruce Wells Associate Campus Editor Barko Koeing Associate Campus Editor Barbara McCowan Graphics Editor Sandy Herd Copy Chief Jean Bowers Kobrowski Editorial Manager Rhonda White Photographers Michael Patterson, Kevin King Business Manager Duncan Butts Retail Bank Manager Alisha Allen Back to School/National Manager Jeff Knox Classified Account Manager Jane Crowell Advertising Make-up/Coupons Manager Staff Artist Jane Brown Photographer Michael Paterson Sales Representatives David Ashley Judy Jonesman, Dayna Bowen, Barbara Habinger, Beth Cohen The "state of mind" is questionable By GENE LINN Editorial Writer Kansan Campus Editor Dan Uk inktest yesterday in a Kansas Senate hearing that was the first challenge to the U.S. Supreme Court's recent controversial ruling on libel cases. The Court ruled on April 18, 1979, that reporters who are defendants in libel suits brought by public figures must reveal what is written of mind" was when the article was written. Ink had been sued for libel for calling a administrator "wretched low-life woman." a State Senate committee reviewing funding for the Kansas called Infotainment to testify on this matter. The hearing convened in a Senate meeting room jammed with local and national reporters, who were calling the hearings before the First Amendment story of the century." heavily-sugared black coffee between spoonfuls of a frosty malt. His "Jawhykes Do It On The Wing" T-shirt was caked with the remains of dozens of late-night pizzas. Ink sat at the witness table gulping THE HEARING was presided over by State Sen. Joe Snort, who had called in testify to revive the senator's flagging unannounced campaign for governor. "Mr. Ink, we are here to pass judgment on a very messy matter," Shannon in his best manner. "What was you state of mind when you wrote the allegedly editorial?" "Well sir, I'll be glad to tell you that. Yer air, no problem there." Ink said, his words laughed. "Oh dear." A dozen cameras clicked. He was terrified he would be yelled at tor the thousandth time that week. "Yes sir, it was about 6 a.m., and I didn't want to step for two. And I didn't just a pot of water." "Yeah, and I was down to a pack of cigarettes so I sent someone out to get two more." "THE PRINT SHOP was yelling at me to get the paper over there, and the editor was yelling at me for general principle. I started a journal article as I finished another Milky Way bar. "I guess that's about it. I was pretty wired." Ink tried to flash an ingratiating smile, but could only manage a silly grin. "That's not exactly what I had in mind, Mr. Ink." Snort said. "You need to tell us whether you maliciously set out to libel the KU administrator." Two dozen cameras clicked. "I sure. I was really out to screw him." "Murray," Short shouted. "You delibuilt me." Wait, the prompt says "Preserve text formatting as it appears in the image." The words are bold. The sentence is split into two lines. Final check of the text: "I sure. I was really out to screw him." "Murray," Short shouted. "You delibuilt me." The output should be: "I sure. I was really out to screw him." "Murray," Short shouted. "You delibuilt me." all out to get me, all of the administrators, why shouldn't I get him,"印Muttered as he pulled a six pack of Buckhorn beer out from under the table and opened a can. "This is too much," Snort shrieked, jumping from his chair. "You call me, red, yellow journalist. I knew all along you were part of the conspiracy!" "I don't understand," Ink said, lowering his head and beginning to scoop huge spoonfuls of frosty malt into his mouth. "Why are you yelling at me?" "Why does everyone yell at me. They're "AND YOU EVEN have the audacity to治安 the crime!" Short screamed. Ink thought for a moment and said, "Oh yeah, where's my head. Here, have one." Warm spray showered the hearing room. "This in an outrage!" Short shouted, "What's wrong with you?" "Conspiracy?" *Ink yelled, after changing his second beer." "Tell me about conspiracy. The chancellor of the University let the air out of my tires last week." Security guards rushed to subdue Ink and Snort. Shocked men run for telephone. As it was led from the room, he said, "too bad that? They're all out to get him, 'no.'" Naturally, she warned, NEITHER could To the Editor: Graduate has the car-loan blues I would like to relate to you an interesting story about the kind of thing you may have to look forward to when that great day of graduation nears. I came back to the University of Kansas to get a master's degree after a number of years teaching in the United States and four years working as an assistant professor years back in Lawrence grinding out my degree, I conservatively lived car-less and charge-less on my adequate but no-frills assistant instructor's salary. I held a 4.0 B.A., and, lo and behold, got a job for fall 1998. Considering carefully the fairly expensive move ahead to the job, the setting up of a new life in a new city, etc., I finally decided I could afford to plunk down what seemed to be my business and finance the rest with visions of the big paychecks to come dancing in my head. Again, the sympathetic polite voice echoed its negative self. The figure behind the desk added with assurance that NEITHER would any other bank in Lawrence grant it since I was moving to Iowa. Though I had made it a practice to pay for everything by cash during these graduate years, I had carefully prepared for the possibility of cumulating, using and mechanically paying off immediately several charges just to secure a lively-looking credit account. I had also made a small household furnishings' kit it off immediately for the same purpose. Clutching my stack of credit cards, fall (University of Iowa) job contract, current KU assistant instructor's contract, credible evidence for a downpayment, I bodily filled out my credit application at First National Bank of Lawrence (where I had maintained two accounts for approximately two years) and met with the consultation with a loan officer, so-called. I now had no debts. Though I had few possessions either, debtlessness felt pretty good to me—given my past world roamings and current state of affairs. Well, one 30-second glance at my situation (?) was all it took for the person to say that she had been hit in the back by the loan. A little shocked but resilient, my pride (at 34 years old, indeed) and suggested my mother, a legitimate property owner from nearby Overland Park, co-sign the loan. THE SUMMER SESSION KANSAN letters Iowa grant it since I won't have lived there long enough. And, since my mother didn't live in Lawrence-proper or Iowa City—touch cookies, sweetheart. So, tough cookies, it was and is. What could I do but retreat, broken-hearted, as one more victim who, without large family holdings, steps out to a society when a simple need arises and gets a response the equivalent of the hard rubber sole of a shoe. We, who have suffered thurfully, will raise our heads again, I suppose, after we have succumbed to and suffered the costs of debtedness that buys us membership in the society's benefits. For now, I guess I'll risk the money! I have on a used car. That our century is ruled by the economic is nothing new. That employees are too often given message-carrying duties and no authority is not a surprise. That one has to have money and property to borrow money is like an adage. The real disappointment to people like me in our society is the contradiction of that sheer, abject helplessness that is the way we try to be a self-sufficient individual any attempt to live a self-sufficient, financially-conservative life. In addition the "policy is policy" syndrome, i.e., "we can't and what means to the market are the industrial circumstances of small loans," is disgusting and reminds me again about all the ugly things I know to be true about the notorious economic animal that we have produced and perpetuated in our society, proud, rich capitalistic, generous society. That society clearly disguised itself as a surrogate parent all these years and now, without a tear, leaves me as an orphan. What a bitch! Peggy Anderson Lawrence graduate student Jazz tunes pervade KU's radio stations To the editor: In her otherwise well-written article Jazex Jones Lawrence on the Summer Ubpent" (June 14 Kansan), Mary Brennan fails to mention that KANU is hardly the only- or even the primary-source of jazz on Lawrence residents' radio dials. For quite some time now, KJIK, the University's other radio station, has been featuring jazz and jazz fusion from 6 a.m. until 10 p.m., followed by colorful stereo, at one ninth watt. Over the year, jazz (old and new) has become a vital element of JKHK's music. We've moved around town time into KJHK in their shops every morning and research has indicated that our 9 a.m. to noon daypart attracts the entire membership of our 24-hour broadcasting day. Each of our jazz announcers works hard and takes pride in maintaining a high level of quality in his or her musical flow. Where he is particularly inclined approach to his excellent programs, carefully annotating each selection, JKHK's announcers simply play the music-generally in fairly long stretches—in reality interjecting a pertinent tid-bit of information. Both approaches have their merits, and we feel that the KU and Lawrence communities are indeed fortunate to be blessed with not one, but two, fine radio stations willing to enrich the ionosphere with the aural delights of jazz. To the editor: Steven Greenwood Overbrook junior Stephen Smithers Northfield, Ill., junior I was very pleased to see an editorial and an article in the June 18 Kansan in support of the expression of views contrary to those of the status quo. Apathy no excuse; students demonstrate I do not, however, agree with one assertion in the article, which was the claim that students are self-centered and apathetic. This assertion is belied by students visibly demonstrating their support for freedom in America and the Third Amendment. Students demonstrated this support for freedom in a rally of 260 students advocating freedom of speech, in a rally of 150 to 200 students opposing indirect investment in South Africa and in a picket of 20 students against the government support of Somoa's regime. I suggest that students cease criticizing themselves as "apathetic Americans," who should not be criticized for any contribution they have made toward causing the reevaluation of nuclear energy, toward the liberation of Iran and its allies, and toward the future in the future, of Zimbabwe and South Africa. Mark Cline Medicine Lodge junior Letters Policy Letters to the editor are welcomed but should be typewritten, double-spaced and no longer than 400 words. All letters are edited and may be condensed according to space limitations and the editor's judgment. Letters must be signed; KU students must provide their academic standing and hometown; faculty must provide their position; others must provide their address. .