OCR Text |
Show Nov. 22, 1974 Signpost Page 9 Guesf Editorial qsnsorship true? ioid aiifrdspect of a denial is that culSve Council denies many e persons and the community 'jghrttfhear and read the views b:Land judge for themselves. ie i denial, therefore, assumes ptepie cannot themselves make on?hy sound judgments and ires someone else to do it for Jhe landmark case of ciated Press vs. United States eo.te?ed the Supreme Court in the conclusion was that iedom of expression presup-s JJiat right conclusions are e likely to be gathered out of a itude'of tongues than through kinlof authoritative selection." Lump together ie 1a fe Winston Churchill, also !Yeijna multitude of tongues, carried that thought "Free crnarries with it the evils of all foolish, unpleasant, venomous ;s ttat are said, but on the whole 'ouH rather lump them together do away with them. " fa:t, the only times that fcrasf -expression has been in-rec'with by government are the irbatices of peace and order, slander, obscenity, lege incitement to immoral iud) .crime or violence, in-aectito. the violent overthrow of overrun ent and sedition, neofthese are the Signpost's orjarpose as we see it. ident government opinions were ntfyrtaken from Executive 2js at Weber State College meriting suspicions of "Cen-iij7.n':Each gave reasons of ;rence rather than the ex-:idnof monetary value, this sense, then yes, the Sign-s being censored. warranted will people finally learn that israurder whether or not it if the sentence is carried out ft frSs'Rme seems doubtful) t(X.?snder what satisfaction iliesof the slain people will fit illurr of two more men will g anyone back. All it does is twoore. What is 'Signpost's' role? By Bobbe Dabling I could almost grant that a campus paper published only twice each week could do without a daily wire service.But in all the dialogue created by the attempt by student government to cancel the Signpost's UPI Wire Service, the most important questions have yet to be discussed. More importantly, they have not even been asked. That is, what is the proper role of this campus newspaper? And what is the proper relationship between student government and the paper? The cancellation of the UPI wire contract is only symptomatic of these yet-unresolved questions. Until these questions are resolved, or at least discussed, the Signpost will not be capable of functioning as it should as a vehicle to transmit news of interest to its audience. Surprising disparity I find a surprising degree of disparity between student leaders, Signpost staffers and a random sampling of students as to what the newspaper's role should be. Some student leaders propose that it should, above all, publish news of students and student activities, with the latter of these two receiving preference. Some Signpost staffers argue that the scope should be wider, that other issues aside from student activities, have merit. And random responses by other students leave an impression that they're not sure what they think it should be, but only that they wish it were "meatier." It is my opinion that the Signpost should serve all three functions. As a newspaper it should publish all news affecting its audience (Weber State students), including campus events, student activities and local, national and international events necessary to keep its readers informed. In this regard, I have not always agreed with the "play" given to some articles or the editorial and news judgment of the present Signpost staff. Who's editor But then I am not the editor, nor is student government, nor are the other 8,000 students on this campus. Dave Midget is editor. He was selected by the media board presumably because he is the most qualified, talented and able person at Weber State College to fill the position. In effect, the media board hired him to perform a job on a one-year contract. He was hired to run this paper as he sees fit. Which brings us to the second question. That is, what is the proper relationship between student government and the campus media. (This would include magazine, radio and newspaper. ) In my judgment the relationship, as it exists, is highly improper. Student government should not have the ability to dictate editorial policies, content or approaches. Right now, it has this power and please note that I have called it "a power" and not "a right." As long as student government has the authority to dictate how money should be used by the Signpost, it has the right to dictate newspaper content. As long as it can shift the make-up of the media board to suit its tastes, it has the ability to dictate newspaper policies. Dictate policy As long as it can pressure the Signpost into publishing student activities which it (student government) judges to be newsworthy, it has the ability to dictate editorial approach. Student government should be removed from the routine operation of the newspaper. It should be removed from the ability to influence newspaper staffers.I am not saying this has been done. Indeed, I find most student leaders here are well-informed, intelligent and rational. In fact, I'm impressed with their caliber of leadership. But I am saying student government has the potential power should it wish to use it. In a loose parallel, student government is in the same position as that of a large advertiser to any general newspaper. That is a significant portion of the paper's finances come from that one source. But the parallel stops there. Student government, ever since I worked as a Signpost staffer in 1963, has had the political and financial clout to effectively stifle the Signpost's policies and content as it wishes. Not even the largest newspaper advertiser in any general paper can claim such powers. Based on this, it can be concluded that the relationship is not only faulty but arbitrary. Until that relationship is changed, until the Signpost is recognized as an independent body and not an arm of student government, such controversies as the UPI wire service will continue. And until then freedom of the press on this campus will not be realized. Letters to the Editor 'Stone' fan Irresponsible Dear Editor, As a former contributor of the First Stone, it was with great interest and disappointment to learn of its cancellation by student government. After a slow, unsteady start, the First Stone emerged as a high-quality well-received publication. It finally appeared that the creative members of the campus had attained an outlet of their own. However, this was not to last. Student government, in its infinite wisdom, refusing funding, thus effectively killing the magazine. Their aim is to push the faltering Acorn (rechristened the Cognito) and generously con-ceeded to devote space for First Stone material. This amount of space turns out to be the sum total of two pages eliminating short stories and photographs. The rest of the publication is dedicated to the further glorification of the jocks, frats, sororities (and student government?).As of yet, the Cognito has not been published; and it appears to be indefinitely postponed. Why was the First Stone cancelled when its replacement wasn't ready to begin publication nor appears to be in the near future, if ever. I highly commend the Signpost staff for all the extra work they put into producing the First Stone. It was an extremely fine literary magazine. It isn't your fault that student government caters to special interest groups instead of the whole studentbody. Christina C. Carrillo Dear Editor, I feel that the Executive Council's action of taking out the UPI machine without any notice was very irresponsible. This practice of controlling the media is unethical and unfair. In my opinion the Executive Council has not fairly represented the students on this issue. I support the Signpost and KWCR's contention that they need UPI. Whenever a democratic form of government can control the press then that system has failed. It merely becomes a farce. I strongly urge all students who disapprove of the Executive Council's actions on this issue to let their views be known. Lance Ziegler More letters on page 10! |