OCR Text |
Show 4 Summer Signpost -Thursday , July 26, 1984 EdhoRiAl Williams Wronged In Greedy Exploitation CBS NEWS IS NOW PROJECTING 6E0R6E CUSTER THE EASY WINNER HERE AT1HE LITHE Bf6 HORN BACK 10 WU, PAN Voting-Qualifications Rather Than Gender by Colleen Mewing Editor-in-Chief Two women made history during the month of July -one woman (Geraldine Ferraro) accepted her challenge and joined forces with Walter Mondale on the Democratic presidential ticket. The other woman, Vanessa Williams, didn't take her challenge and stepped down as Miss America, the first woman ever to do so in the history of the prestigious contest. Williams posed in the nude in 1982 for photographer Tom Chiapel. Two years and one title crown later, Williams was exposed in the September issue of Penthouse Magazine thanks to the greedy photographer, who was out to make a fast buck and a quick name for himself. This kind of ruthless action that was taken by Chiapel is, to me, a form of 'legal' blackmail. Once Williams had seen the negatives of the photos Chiapel had taken, she chose not to have any prints made. A photographer reserves the right to keep the negatives, and thus they stayed in Chiapel's possession. In 1982 neither Chiapel nor Williams knew who would reign as the 1984 Miss America. Williams had no idea that these photos would be used against her -in a fashion much like blackmail, so that her title would be jeopardized. Chiapel has probably taken many photos -some nude -some portraits -etc,. How many of his negatives are collecting dust until one of his models makes a name for herselfhimself, only to have Chiapel snatch herhis just rewards with photos splashed across some magazine? It isn't fair that Williams has to be made the- example. For Williams, her only choice was to relinquish her crown. And if she wouldn't have stepped down, the Miss America pageant committee would probably have taken her title away. Once Williams became Miss America I'm sure that she never thought that these photos from the past would come back to haunt her. For one thing, a person (especially a trusted photographer) wouldn't do such a thing to another person. But when it comes to money and scandal, people will do anything. I must commend Playboy Magazine for refusing to buy Chiapel's photos. Playboy has much more class. But on the other hand, Penthouse played right into the hands of the other half of the blackmail scheme, paying Chiapel, who knows how much money, for the photos. (If they had been photos of an unknown, they wouldn't have been worth a penny. But photos of an unknown who becomes a celebrity are worth quite a bit of money). I'm sure that this example will cause other women to think twice before having their picture taken -whether it be in the nude or in explicit poses or having their photo taken period. Models and aspiring young actresses should be the first to take such precautions, as should anyone having their picture taken. Chiapel has broken a code of ethics that will make it hard for all women to trust their photographers. New contracts will have to be written to ensure that something like this will never happen again. Photographers who do have a trustful reputation will now have to work twice as hard in making sure that their subjects feel their rights are protected when having their photos taken. Williams, now as a private citizen and not our coveted Miss America, should pursue, through our court system, this injustice and let Chiapel pay his dues for his unprofessionalism. by David C. Wright News Editor As you all know (hopefully) San Francisco, the'ei-ty with curvy streets and sometimes curvy minds, recently was host to an amazing, yet vital part of the American political process. As the dust from the fights, and the confetti from the celebration settles, the results of the Democratic National Convention must be examined closely by all concerned voters. A tattered and tired Walter Mondale walked away victorious and was also quite successful at applying some first aid to a one-time badly divided party. Gary Hart didn't cry, and Ted Kennedy was amazingly gracious. Walter Mondale left that convention with a history-making companion, who no doubt will involuntarily usurp much of. Walter's limelight. The three term Congresswoman from blue-collar Queens, Ms. Geraldine Ferraro, has become a politico to be reckoned with. Every word she utters from now to election day will be scrutinized by the press, the Democrats and her avowed enemies the Republicans. The excitement of a possible woman Vice-President is certainly permeating the nation, but once the novelty subsides, some very serious questions must be asked about the vice presidential candidate. There must be no reference made to sex, only qualifications need be considered. Question 1: Will they be able to handle the office of Vice President of the United States, and act with decisiveness, tact and diplomacy in representing the President to foreign heads of state? Question 2: Will they be an effective lobbyist in Congress on behalf of the President for executive programs? Question 3: If the President was to become incapacitated, or die in office, will they be able to grasp the reins of power and send a message to the country and the world that the U.S. remains stable? These questions should be applied to any Vice Presidential Candidate, for they are the essence of the office. Before we get caught up in the excitement and emotion of a woman on the ticket, we must consider the person's qualifications. If the vice president would be viewed as a potential president, then we might take that too often overlooked position more seriously. Eight times in our history a vice president has assumed the presidential duties due to the death or resignation of the president. Twice a vice president was elected to the highest office because of his association with a popular president. When we consider those statistics, we realize how important that maligned office of vice president is. So, to all of you concerned, aware voters, let's look at Ms. Ferraro and Mr. Bush as carefully as we do Mondale and Reagan. Letters to the Editor Policy The Signpost welcomes Letters to the Editor. Letters should be typed, double spaced and not exceed 250 words. The Signpost reserves the right to edit for reasons of space and libel, and the right to refuse to print any letter deemed inappropriate. Each letter must include the name, address and signature of the writer. Anonymous letters will not be printed. Letters may be submitted at the Signpost office, UB"267 or mailed to the Signpost, mail code 2110. |