OCR Text |
Show Pub Council Procedures: In Need Of Modification? The following is the text of our decision on Mr. J. Bauman's complaint, com-plaint, as contained in a letter to President Fletcher and the Board of Regents: On Tuesday, Feb. 6, the Student Regulations Committee met with representatives of Public a-tions a-tions Council to discuss a complaint against the Council by Mr. J. Bau-man. Bau-man. The complaint alleged violation viola-tion of fair play in the selection of a Chronicle Editor and asked that the Student Regulations Committee invalidate the Council's selection of Editor. No Jurisdiction This Committee acknowledges that it is not the proper body to rescind decisions by Publications Council; however, the Committee does feel that it has the responsibility responsi-bility to review alleged violations of students' rights of fair play. On the basis of our meetings with the Publications Council and Mr. Bauman, the Committee reports the following findings: 1. The Committee feels that Publications Pub-lications Council as a whole acted in good faith in their selection of the Chronicle Editor. 2. Although the Committee feels the Council was not unfair in allowing allow-ing a late and oral application to be considered in the selection of the six finalists, the Committee does not condone such procedural irregularities. 3. The Committee feels that the selection of the six finalists without oral interviews of all nine applicants appli-cants was basically unfair. The selection was made on the basis of personal knowledge of applicants by individual committee members from admittedly inadequate information in-formation from the nine applications. applica-tions. The Committee makes the folic fol-ic wing recommendations: 1. That Publications Council complete com-plete the work that it has begun on the creation of student application applica-tion forms for the selection of editors. edi-tors. (The Publications Council should be commended for its adoption adop-tion of standard questions to be x asked of each applicant during the oral interview.) 2. That all applications for Editor should be interviewed orally, unless the number of applications is unreasonably un-reasonably large. 3. That Publications Council publicize pub-licize the procedure and criteria for the selection of Editor well in advance ad-vance of the application deadline. 4. That Publications Council formulate form-ulate a more permanent procedure for the selection of Chronicle Editor. Edi-tor. We appreciate the cooperation of Publications Council and Mr. Bauman Bau-man with the Committee in the review of this case. Fred W. Finlinson, Chairman Student Regulations Committee Editor: It is curious that Mr. J. Bauman should want to reopen his complaint against the Publications Council for its failure to appoint him editor of the Chronicle, after a full hearing of that complaint had been provided. And it is even more curious that he should entitle his essay "In Defense of Responsibility," when the text is an exercise in journalistic and editorial irresponsibility. ir-responsibility. Mr. Bauman alleges that a precedent has been established for the review of Publications Council decisions by the Regulations Regu-lations Committee, when he is fully aware that no such precedent pre-cedent has been set. He has read the relevant documents and was present when the issues were aired, and he knows that the Regulations Committee did not assert a claim to jurisdiction of Council decisions and that the Council did not concede the existence of any such authority. He may also know that a judicial body could not extend its legitimate authority simply by asserting its interest. If the Regulations Committee did want to extend its authority in accordance with Mr. Bauman's desires, presumably it would need to seek some legislative or higher judicial authorization. Prove Conspiracy Mr. Bauman also insinuates, against his own knowledge to the contrary, that the Council selects candidates "on the basis of political affiliation." This allegation might be excusable excus-able if it were the result of ignorance, but clearly no such excuse is available in this case. Mr. Bauman attempted to make a case against the Council in the hearing before the Regulations Committee, and the attempt substantially failed. If he now has evidence of a political conspiracy, let him exhibit that evidence. If he does not, his respect for responsibility ought to induce him to stop maligning the Council. It is obvious that no editor selected by the Council could be satisfactory to all legitimately interested people, but it seems equally clear to me that the fairness of the Council's recent re-cent procedure has been substantially established. If Mr. Bauman Bau-man has nothing stronger to go on than the hearsay he operated oper-ated with in the last round, I would think it time for him to find a new subject to write about. Peter C. Appleby P.S. Copies of the Publications Council's full reply to Mr. Bauman's Bau-man's original charges are available in the office of Mr. Jan Van Orman, in the Student Union. |