A Choice, Not an Echo (May 1966)

PAGE 1

,/ NOT AN ECHO B. G. 1964A NOTE ON PURPOSE: In this month's issue of s magazine there appeared an excellent analysis of college newspapers. The author, a former college editor, has found that there are generally two types of campus pa uers the '1Passi ve" papers, school-' supported, which devote most of the1r expensive, glossy issues to ''safe'1 problems like student government cmd PR handouts ; and the active'' papers, usually self-supporting, set in a more liberal and controversial school which ac ti vcly and influen involve themselves in all the aspects of their academic and social atmosphere. Frorn the point of view of its po t;ntial, Catalyst is in an al unique position. In a new and exnerimental institution which en courages 8 .nd pays heed to the ad Vice of its students in forming its policies, The Catalyst is, through tl1e efforts of its hard-working staff. an efficient, self-supporting any outside influ ence. Hhy then, except for an occa sional are we subjected week vreek to little more than a junior high schGol emo tion9.l of his student 't The fault is Mr. Toddfs. He has co::1zciously and consistently ignored the opportunity and abused the res given him. His primary concerns have become the d5.. .10red i tlng and insul tlng of those who disagree with hli:. anU. packi:ng th, 3 SEC th those TJho '1think the way I As a result, we have to e:ftress and encouraa;e others to express what we hope will be some Hide-ranging student edJ. tor1al opj_nion, Nhile letting ''The Cata-lyst" (sic) remain an_ impeccably :, curr..alis;:;ic forum for PR handouts, construr-toon photos Bnd Tom Todd. David Pini Charles R2eburn The above views are obviously not nrcessarily those of the contributors. THE ETHICS OF EDIT(OR)ING The continuing trend of pulpiteerism in The Catalyst editorship, regarding editorial treatment of letters and comments contrary to the editor's views, raises the thorny question of editorial ethics. Given that Mr. Todd is editor of the student newspaper and thus in a formal sense is ultimately responsible for the tone and content of our newspaper, does he therefore the right to disregard the of the m8mbers of his stsff on maJor editorial policies'? As one who has edited student newspapers in the past including The Catalyst, and has definite beliefs concerning ethics of editing, I answer the above question with a vigorous ''No. '1 (I do not mean to j_mply expertise in editorial ethics, but to state that I am familiar with the several facets of the issue.) It is :::bt the editor's prerogative as a voice for and nirror of student opinion, to use the newspaper as a \ soapbox from which to champion his personal positions and prejudices. Neither can an editor expect the continued enthusiasm and support of his staff if he insists upon ramming editorial policy, in violent contradiction with their views, down their throats. Nor does he deserve their support if his attitude is so blatantly dictatorial. Concerning the editor as dictator in his personal journalistic fiefdom, I cj_ to a sGction of his '1Good Governmen-'c'1 editorial of last week: ''Bill Chadwick has done an outstanding job on the Student disciplinary Comm1 ttee ... He Jill have to very hard in the future, however, to improve his record of absenteeism from SEC meetings ... I must point out Mr. Todd's tactic of adoption of a patronizing approach followed by a personal judgment of Hr. Chadwickas capabilities. vlho does Mr. Todd exactly think he is, the Ultimate and Mighty Judge Of Man? This section of the editorial smacks of Pravda-type journalism.

PAGE 2

(continued from page 1) 'Comrade Chadwick, regardless of his achievements in the past, will have to work very hard in the future to improve his record or the party will be forced to purge. '1 The matter of recall of certain members of the SEC is but another of Mr. Todd s crusades which most students find unnecessary and unwanted. Does it not seem strange that the three SEC members whom he found acceptable have supported positions in the past which in large measure coincide with his own .'? If this petty editorial support for personalities with little tolerance for those with opposing viewpoints is accepted and ethical? the future of journalism is indeed bleak. The procedure by which initiation of recall was handled also stinks. Most would probably concur that a person charged with negligence or non-performance should have the opportunity to answer the charges levelled against him. The members of the SEC to be recalled were given no such chance. They were notified of the impending action late Thursday night by Mr. Todd's henchmen, given inadequate and poorly reasoned excuses for the action, i .e. you don't have enough crusading zeal for an .3ec member, thus deprived of effective rebuttal publicly, and since they were notified so late, in practical fact were given no chance to answer the charges against them or to substantiate their capabilities as an SEC member It would seem that those who initiated the recall could use some schooling in courtesy and common decency. On the qualifications of those persons who initiated recall to do so, have Messrs. Treynor, Alexander, Bowen et al served as major leaders and participants in student affairs or serving as pawns for a crusading editor? Do these people derive satisfaction fro m a crisi s atmosphere on camp us? Do those pressing for recall have a platfrom or candidates of their own'? To paraphrase words of Edmund Burke, it is not enough to prove a society less than perfect to justify its overthrow; one must also prove that a new society or institution is likely to do better. Again concerning the student newspaper: why is it necessary for the newspaper constantly to crusade, especially for student government matters'? Practically every campus newspaper throughout the country crusades for student government, yet The Catalyst, inthis experimental sit uation, is in a favorable and unique position to criticize and suggest academic policies and other matters of significance. Has the exalted editor become victim of a p ower complex? Or has his enhanced position with that venerable Hillsborough county paragon of journalistic excellence caused a swelling of his honorable head'? Charles Raeburn THE CONCEPT OF GOVERNMENT Twenty years ago Peter F Drucker wrote a remarkably penetrating book on corporate structure. The organizational concept he analyzed, t hat of decentralization, has since been copied by every major corporation in the world. Decentralization was not planned from above, nor did it just grow. It was a conscious evolution following several broad concepts. Concepts like that behind the Code of Consideration or that a student government is just there to solve student problems and represent stude1t-1nterests. "The purpose of such a concept is never to serve as a rigid rule. Rather it is to be used as a compass bearing taken across rugged mountains. The actual trail will follow the natural contours of the terr a in; but the bearing will give the de viation from the true course at every step and will thus ultimately lead to the objective, however great the detou r and however much the objective has been lost sight of on the way

PAGE 3

Mr. Todd, the former 3DRC and those members of the SEC who think they can solve all our problems by abandoning the Code of Consideration, amending the Constitution, appending the Bylaws and Modes of Procedure and obeying Robert's Rules, lose all sight of their function. A theoretical plan becomes an end in itself; and concrete administrative action--the first system any system of government--becomes impossible. rj When referring to the organization of one of the largest and most efficient corporations, r:Jr. Drucker points out ''\-/here the logician and system maker (and philosophy major) would expect logical consistency, there are large gaps. This or that problem that theoretically should have been answered one way or another simply has never come up and has not been answered at all." "This is true of all human organizations. Being human, they can never aspire to perfection and must thus make imperfection workable. Being human they also have to reckon with the very considerable differences of temperament, ability, and rhythm between individuals." Take, for instance, Hr. Hamilton. At SEC meetings he is pedantry personified. His useless proposals pretend to solve no problem or represent any s tudent interest. But he is an elected representative and my personal opinion of his qualifications is certainly no grounds for my leading others into recalling him. After all, for a management to be efficient, it must contain a sprinkling of executives who p ay very little attention to the rules .. and are inclined toward a rather autocratic, 'do-this-or-bedamned' attitude," and we can always count on Hr. Hamilton to be an effective check to the abuse of this efficiency. Another important p oint brought out is the value of adequately represented interests to the decision-making process. This is especially relevant to consideration of a proctor, for here the SEC is representing two interests, neither of them those of tbe majority of the students, who neither want, nor see the need for a proctor. The first interests are those outdated and theoretical ones of the student representatives themselves. They say that the 'jpolicemen" and ''judges11 shouldn't be the same people, and then out of imaginary fear of their imaginary proctor link the two with a system o f warrants. They claim that a system based on complaints and consideration for others can't work, in spite of the fact that it has, and propose to correct this defect by adding one more person to the disciplinary channels. Their proposals grew out of haste and misconceptions, the committee of their origin was disbanded because it had never accomplished anything, and one imagines that even the original proponents no longer find them convincing. The other interests, those of the faculty residents, are more convincing, or at lea st Mr. Miller cites numerous concrete instances when he has been called on to aid in disciplinary matters and says a proctor should be doing this. The reason people call on Mr. Miller, however, is not that there is just no proctor, but rather out of habit and trust. Perhaps it is not unreasonable of students to expect the faculty residents to assume some of the responsibilities that come with belonging to any community. If the new security guard can win the students' confidence he Will naturally find himself called on when people see the need, especially when we know Mr. Miller would rather not be bothered. But to attempt to legislate such a role is a n effort bound to create more tension and antipathy than it alleviates. David Pini want to thank Esther Lynn Barazzone, Allen tt 9 Bill Chadwick and Kenji Oda for their contributions to this paper. We hope that other members of the student body wil contribute their views on any topics ranging from student government, to birth control9 to world affairs.

PAGE 4

TO THE SWWDENT BODY: Perhnpo it in n o t my pluc. ao one of dir ectly involved in the current recall :co ntrovor::::r:: to ::::ny t I am o.bout to no.y, bat ho.:J to. Tho il con trovcr::;y of cl1 I is c. hopolo 3:::: ruclc.Uo of )or::;oralitiuo en( io:::uco. As a:::: I can clotarwinc, of recall })roccdt.rc:::: did oo (1) t:wy fool there not on can 1dll do bettor jobo on t'han so JO of t_lc c.rront :JCnbor.s; ( 2) s)ccifico.lly, t:1cy do not thO D.ttitud 3 to:ro.rd .::t1dcnt ':OVOrl1rJCnt '1:1ic:1 t:10 Ji:: :10.Ve "clCr.10n:Jtratcd, II cho.ro.ctcrizod by a lac': of cora;.Junicc.tion :1i th their consti tuo:1t:J, and an inc.'.:-ill ty to t:10 i'ull i;.Jplicntio!lo of -:rho. t they do. i!ou, sor.1c of my fcllo:r S. C ncnbor::: :1o.vo 1 :oc...c.l;-/ ely defc!1dcd t:1cir for of:ico. Certo.inly, if tho ::;c )eo)le ::: re so incliffcrcn t, then it i:::: to credit t:1o. t t'1oy co:1:Ji 3 ton tly :Jhou n t s=:c and vote, t:1en defon( t:lO::.-;olvc::; chnllon::.;od c1e::;pitc their lac': of c-cru:::o.dinc att::.t-..:clo it :1o.::; been )Ointod 9ut:, all o- one of t:w instl:c.tor::J of recall failed to cler.Jonotrc..tc any at-tempt o f their oun nt corm::mnicc. tinr; uith t:1o .::tudont lJo(l.y or the s:::;c. But c..ll this is, .:.n my O_)inion, S()condary to c.. ir.l;}ortn.nt issue. Less attention ::;ho uld be paid to )or:::ono.litio::; and lsoucs, and nornc should be :J!)Cnt in cxo.ninin.::.; sono of :)rinciplo 3 invol vod. Todd and LQrry Alexander, t:ro of the forces behind initiation of recall both ndr:1ittocl il1 )rivato t only one or tuo of tl'le s:::;c r.10nboro done t.2e:,r fool i::: o. :'bud" job, end t:uiL t'ho fault uit:1 the ot:10rn iG t:1o.t t lOJ aren't t:1e bo3t :Joo:>lc c.vailable. There can be no o.rr;ur.wnt :1cro. But is this v d c;rounds for recall? I cannot be r.JOrc in :'no.:: To cite n. unfair a no.lo.::.;y, jclJ t bccau::w nillion3 of people .._fool Barry could be o. better )resident tho.n Lr. Johnson, is thiG valid croundo roco.ll of tho Pro::;idont? Certainly, the poopjpe :1o.vc t 10 lc.::.;o.l ri::1t to do ... o, but, in of the 11full 1 of sue!1 a.n actio:c, uould it be ju::; tifiod? The fn.ct is!tho.t pouors of rcco.ll uerc )rovidod for in tho s:::;c charter to protect t:1c .:::tudonto fro,,J dictatorial Ol" bur.Jblinc officials. It uas: nut, ho.JCvor, !Jrovidcd Li order to r.1o.jori ty to :::quclch a minority. In ex )lo.nc..tion, note t:1o.t in cl:;ctL1G t:1eir re,rcJcntativcs, st1..1dont:::; ucre von one fo:rer vote t:w.n t:1e nur.1bor of Jontati vco each clo.s::: 'Ic.s 'l:'l1e roo..Jon:i.:lC behin( this :>olicy :ro..:J in thio 11o.y, a vio:r not to.:;c.lly dor.Jino..tc the lfou, if recall i::; to be U8Cd 801:10 people cli::wcree rit:1 tho vocil1C policie::: or t:1e :1c.ttitu.dc3' of t:1oir re)ronento.t:vo::;, oven if a :Jo.joritJ, then ,rotoction of Qin ority i::; lo:::t. As fcllor-re;>,...o8cnto.tive .:iay ::n.:::lou fir.:t )oi:1tec out to .. ;c, r or o:1ould be de 3.:..c;nod to be used only to rcmo 'o c.n o fi ci o..l uho has clcr.Jon:JtrcblJ L1 c:10 c.Xec",)tion of _li3 dutio:::, not uhen his vio:.r:J co.1:llict ::i t:1 t:1o.::;o of 1)D.rt !i.J oloctoro.te. Of cou:r :.:;o, fc.iL'.rc on tho :x.rt a ro_)ro :::entc.ti ve to at tempt any comr.JUnica1.;ion :i t:1 :1i c ole c tor ate r.liGht :roll 'be intor:Jro ted no r.1ali'eo.:::a .. ce on :1i::; p o.rt. :Gvt the :::y:::to .1 .:or':::: bot:1 .myn. '.r:.1o very :)OO)lo nupport recall huvo \'l['..de )t::: to t:wir o.ncl in:::tead :wve dccic.'..cd to cot rid of t:1o:::o \T:lo ::;o vio.r:.:; fool C-l"o irro ::PJonsi ble. I no e::cu.::e:::: fol' !)C.3t ineffi::ioncy of .J:;c. This r.wc:3 over rodc.ll ha:::, I c.n sor.Jc r.1er.1bo:;.'::; vO t .. o. lone; loolc at

PAGE 5

'ehow:wlvcs a.nd t:1cir rolo:J a..; ::;tuclont rc)ro..;cncc.t.Lvo:..;. :Uut r.1.; )Oint remnino-in:Jti reca.ll for :>=c r.JOr.Jbor::; for t:1o va.[;uo ren:::0.13 ci von a SoJCtit;w.:; t:1oro :-ro tor t:1o.n L1o ones of ::.;ctl:.inc out L: :)co:1lo you clo:11 t li1:o end )u:;tLl;_: t:1o you do. T:1iJ i:::: O'lc in:.ta..1co hero t L.: true. Under t:lC co Jt 0 r :no )rO ti vo rovorn. ont' no official i3 required to run o""J.t ..... cmd tc.'.:o o. )Oll o.L' tc.wncy to 300 :1ou he should vote. Ire io olcctoc1 o:1 t:1o t .:..,t :1i.J clectoro.to :1nn rrivon o. mo.ndato to vote as he feels .:;hould. If record i:::: un::;ati:Jfac tory, hi::: :1nvo o:)tion of nou rc-oloct.i.:'1.:.: l.1L1. noco.ll ca.n o.nd ohould be u:::od to renovo QO.lfoc.:::a2t officials. It should not be L.:Jod, n1..r .1 iJc::;io and/or o.ttitudos. .:cnji Odn. :Tote: Ly a)_)eo.rancc in thl::: o.c.1 :1oc foru.r:1 for ed.i tor.:.o.l co i:; no :ray i:1dicc.to::: Oil ny )o.rc :;i t:1 t:1o to.'io.l coi;L.Jont.J nbout 'i'l1o Cc.taly:::t r21ich D.) )ec.r i:; t:w :no::.:Jblo to t:1:i.'J _)Ublico.tion. '.L'J1i.J c.rticlo a::; a. lotcor to editor in Cato.ly::;t, but I choJo to ap )OO.r in t:1i.:: conto::t duo '.:;o ti:wli:1o::::;, etc. ,, ., .. ,, .... letter i:: [!.clc.:ro::::;.:::ccl to t:10 tor of t:1c Cc.ta.lyst: De[!.r l.r. :::::ditor, 'I'hi::: letl,er i.:; in ro::;pon:w to t:w ocli coPial.::. i:1 tiw lc.st (u::.:r 13, 1966) i.:J.:;ue of 1Tho I.Jatalyst:r :"'.ncl tocortc.in c.::d facts t:wt have boon circula tine; ro co:1 tly. You :ron: in !Jc.yinc that I:nolou, Dunst:rorth, o.nd liar.Jil ton rrcrc t:lC only active c.nd func tioninc: s of tho s::;c. Al tllouc> .. may very aptly de ::;crJ.. be as t:10 r.1ont valuable m0171bor of tho s=:c, the other hc.vo do:1o no t.JOro of bcnefi t to the collece than any othcl" no .. JborJ of Lhe ttoo. ...\ creal. doal o.L tho cons tructive activity d0'1o tho iJ the of it::; sub-cor.lr:Jittces. or the t:1roe nor.Jbor:J co:ncnded by :r'l1ho 1 onl7 Jn::;lou ha:::; served on any "lthouc:1 l.r. :Jl.m:J'Torth hc..s dono o. r.10st cor:1 ;cndable job aJ :::ccreto.ry, he ho.:J had relatively lictlo to::;ay, c.nd :ws dono even lens touard :::;oc::ri"' .::; t:1c recent _)rocros3 cited b,r :r.r:1c Gataly:::::t Of the four most recent pro:Jo nal.'J of 2-.ny con ton t offered by Lr. Ilanil ton, t, :o uero defoa.tcd by to be ::;oco:docl that not other ncmber t:1o .. 1 debate), o. third :ro.; c.lef'(;o.tod by a. 7 1 vote, and the fourth Wl.; tablod only to be :rithclrn.-'Il ::..c ro...::: brou::;ht U) for J\1 thouch thi 3 i::; no rofloc tio:1 of 1.::; true c.bili tj' this record i::; not t:1o ty1;c ti1at Jould loc.tl 0:1e connect it ::i t:1 a. lender of a coJr.Jitteo. ::o:rovcY', t:w :;i .:: .. ;cr:bo:.."..:: rl1o nero c.:.tcd c..:::. beinc dotriucnto.l to t:10 S:C, are all :Jcrvi:1C on at leC.:Jt 0:10 of t:lC 31.10-COtJ.Jitteeo, ,.m.nd, an I l1avc nontioncd before, r."JO:::t of t:1o t:10 o...). ,c by the student:J aro dolec;atcc.l to tl1c va.riouc oub-coi'.nittoo.s for It ha.::; boon tho :Joti'cion for :Dccall .or Ocla is ba8od on the :::up)O :::i tion tho. t '1o cc.:1 1 t c ti velJ ::;erve on bot:1 1 1 The Cataly::;t'1 ::;tCJ.ff ..,nd t'1c ::..;_,C. ::o:rcv.:r, it 8.))ecr::; to :JC t:1c.t L1o editor of 1.!Tho Cataly::;t" mu::;t sryend tit.JO boi..'.Joon t: c t:ro i't.uctions a:s any one 'JO:J:Jibly co. uld .1c 3oor;1--.: t) fool t:1e1.t t:10 drc .:.:1 on tiuo :is not too If is loo 1 )O.:J:Ji.ve' ;rdoc.:m't :10.ve enour(h to :/dy1 ti10n Tim :t;::; :::l'Jo too 'pc::::nlvo and 11clocsn1t cnourm to 38.J 1 a.nd thi::::: certainly l ::;n' t true. Furtl10rr.1orc, has been aoie

PAGE 6

l -'I I t. j ... -J ) 1 () ,; > J. 1 1 c ) < ... t r i "" --r; c r > )-c > L t, t: 2 """: J tc. ..... # "' .. 1.: 1 >tc ;-; K L t; L c > .:11: '-u 'lr;C ) x : ., :.:i -; ( :.' : .:' L ) ::; o l Lc L L '' > <: 1C' ,. r I I 'L --i :: 1.' -', ;-. ') _,_' v 1. (' ; .l. 8 ) .1 ( .. :. v -cc :.''1 J 1 c 1 .. Vn:' _; : c s .. ,. l ..... l:; l. -) -(.1 "' 1 "" .... r ,. i. -' . .... """-, '.,. c I_ I. '1 .\f< .G t L:<>t ( .. :. H L 'f)J:"-)." '_, .r( ) v r) -';:;> L 1C:. L :c .:; L ) _,_ ...... ) .. '< L1.0 .-1 -. .. -.. ,",( ''/ L l. l ; Lc I ,_._,_-. L c )>1(( ::L c-: l ";1 :..., : ... l.... "" .; -c \, v -U' l'-' lr-'. -clrG.-. t lr .... !I S.!OU.lrl i;o n l C ;on ... (' c L t,., L )l1S l l'l '-"-.I ". "" -' l ;..;? At no time did 1:;, 'fend to circulate tbe petitions" to recall various members of the $EC; nor, infact, was I a part of the group which intended to do so. Since I have been assured b y Mr. Alexander and Mr. Treynor that my aame was not given to The Catalyst as desiring individual recall of any member of the BEe, I can only assume that Ifme Catalyst misrepresented the facts given to them. I first learned of the recall intentions when Mr. Alexander approached a number of students silipport for a new election. While I feel a new election to be desirable (for reasons which will be presented below), I differ with hls intentions for and methods of. achieving this end, and clarified by position by declincyng to work with his recall group or sign any petition of recall. I emphasize that the :. ,)jc-cti objective of strengthening sbudent government is highly woEthwmile, but the methods recently attempted are not the most direct. In slight defense of the SEC, I should like to remind those students seeking recall of past commlttees and their lack of both attendance and relatedly, definitive action. in contrast to these past committees the SEC has beeangenerally productive and perceptive of student attitudes. However, it does seem that the has been overly concerned with the philosophical prcblems of the college community such as students' rights, etc. and has overlooked 'trivial' (i.e., administrative) matters. For example, the MP Committee left a very simple system for registering pets which could have been quickly and effectively handled by only one member of the SEC (By the way, surely the ability to work will with or for a committee is: oo:tl )necessarily related to the ability to be vocal--it may even be a hindrance--but on the other hand, working will with a committee does not necessitate membership in it.}; yet we, the students, have now lost the right to handle our own pet registration. Is it perhaps the case that the SEC.-is too involved with philosophical problems to concern itself with these menial administrative tasks? If so, they are making a lamentable m&stake and need to be aware of it--or be replaced. If, indeed, the members of the SEC have been lax occasionally, can we not attribute this laxity, at least in part, to the student body's, our, reactions to themr proposals? The student Bill of Rights was defeated not

PAGE 7

. because people boted against it but rather because many students aien't bote at all. It seems to the sse to continually draw up proposals or more impontant, to represent us well when many students do not bother to mark their ballots. The contention that non-boting is the same as voting against an issue is misleading; while in fact, the two may be equated, non--voting can be easily mistaken for genuine student apathy, not "passive resistance 11 and engender similar apathy within the SEC. If the proposals of the SEC, our feelings should be unequivocally demonstrated to our representatives whether by voice or by vote. .. ,.One more point deserves mentioning. Living up to its name, The Catalyst has done much to stmmulate genuine interest in the workings of student government and to point out ins shortcomings. Mr. Todd's editorials have been occasionally terse, provecative, and incisive. However, as Mr. Waterman pointed out in last week's Catalyst, when editorial pmlicy begins to bias a paper's ability to report news in an objective fashion, the quality of that newspaper greatly suffers. Either the Editor should confine his editorials to the proper page or otherwise, so state h$$ policy. For to facts editorially under the guise of objectivitY,yand impartiality (valid goals, I feel, for a good newspaper) is poor ethics. Only indirectly related to the recall issue is the following. Student problems, particularly in the past few weeks, have led to the formulation of the proposal to have two elections each year instead of one. Student government is a very time-consuming affair, and while a representative's enthusiasm may be high at the qeginning of his term, it undoubtedly diminishes as time goes on. After one-half year a representative's desire tc remain deeply involved in student government may well be subject to wiser analysis; also of course, the assessment.o bis.ability to represent his electors is election would facilitate such decisions. Whereas resignation and recall are essentially negative processes, another election would afford the representative who so wished to gracefully and quietly step office. For those representatives seeking office again, the second election i would serve as a vote of confidence.from the electorate. Surely this would reawaken both suudents and representatives to the role of student go:v.e rnment, somethigg that is perhaps being forgotten. Allen Whitt * We should like to thank all those involved with the publication of this paper. Many enthusiastically volunteered opinions and services have had to be deferred until future issues. C.R. and D.P.