| OCR Text |
Show CHRONICLE MAILBOX the Chronicle chose to break the story. It is unjust to the candidates if this, along with the full text of the letter, is not published. Phil Barlow (Editor's Nclc: After recognizing the importance of the story, the Chronicle took maximum precautions to assure that the matter was reporting re-porting concisely, completely and fairly. Contrary to Barlow's allegation, all twelve freshmen were contacted or messages were left for them to ccntact the Chronicle immediately upon their receiving them. (The "obvious misrepresentations" to which Barlow refers result from, in the case of Marjorie Meads, two diametrically opposing statements state-ments emerging from interviews with Chronicle staff members. With regard to Barlow's statement regarding Von Whitby, we invite him and other Chronicle readers to reread the original article, which states that, "although he did know about the letter, he had not seen it." (As to where the letter came from, it was impossible to find a common com-mon denominator between the statements given to us by the candidates and Barlow. Publication of the original letter, which is political in intent, on the day of elections when the authenticity of the endorsement is in doubt is out of the question. If Barlow, or anyone else involved, wishes to enlighten the Chronicle as to what happened, the Chronicle will do its best to pass the information along to the University.) Chronicle go broke. I, for one, could not exist if I did not get a chance to read Odd-Bodkins over a cup of luke-warm Huddle mud. It is time that those opposed to the present editor and his backing accept the fact that there is talent hidden deep within this man. For example it was Mabey who started a program wherein lower staff members get experience in putting out a newspaper. The last several papers have ben publishd without the help of Mabey. - In instituting this program Mr. Mabey has proved that he has a masterful grasp of the problems that face an editor, explicitly the problems arrising when no one knows what to do. Mabey has insured in-sured that the Chronicle will have an ample supply of experienced workers to carry on the noble endeavors en-deavors of journalism. I only hope that the trainees have proper political po-litical background to fill the job. Joel Kester ' Barlow Charges Letter Misrepresentation Editor: It seems that two unfortunate misrepresentations have been made in regards to the now famous "election letter" mentioned in the Chronicle yesterday. The first was an organizational problem relating to the names appearing ap-pearing on the letter sent freshmen students asking them to vote in the ASUU elections and pointing out that it was felt that three candidates were especially qualified. The second, which compounded the first, was the unfortunate way the Chronicle reported the "facts." There are obvious misrepresentations in the story itself, viz. Miss Meads being listed as not contacted and then listed as stating she was "approached about signing" the letter and stating, "I said I would," and Von Whitby, who knew about the letter and its contents and was in agreement agree-ment (although he did not see the letter), and who the Chrony states he did not even know about it. I must hope and assume that the pressure of deadline caused the Chrony's failure to contact such signers as Steve Poulson, Kay Hardy, Pat Hurley, etc. who were and are in full support of the letter. In fact, Marjorie Meads, greatly distressed at her interview and its interpretation, had to have a gross misrepresentation of her statement changed late in the day, avoiding further error in the story. To me the story was too important not to have the full facts aavilable, even if it was so desirable, for the Chronicle, to have the story break on election morning. This is the most distressing item, not the distortion in the story itself, or even the front page coverage, which I consider logical considering the newsworthiness of the story, but that the reporters who interviewed me chose not to quote me as to the actual conception of the letter. Instead, by innuendo, the letter is attributed in its entirety to me. I told the reporters, more than once, that I was approached by several freshmen wanting to know if the candidates I was supporting and whom they felt were most qualified, would be interested in such a project. After checking, I responded favorably, provided the names were cleared for each of the candidates and only then given to me. I agreed to assist with- the letter's composition. These were freshmen students interested in-terested in helping the candidates they felt best, but also in increasing participation in the campaign and election. I must wonder why the Chrony has chosen not to publish the full contents of the letter, they have a copy! Since I knew two or three of the signators listed and knew of their agreement, I agreed to proceed. That they agreed, even though they did not actually see the letter, should be stressed, since the paper chose to emphasize only the latter. We all know, now, that this was not the case for all those listed, and this is most unfortunate. I will andor have apologized to those who felt unjustly committed. Never-the-less, the Chrony chose to delete where the letter came from, this I can not understand. I accept full responsibility for letting a printing deadline interfere with a double check of the names, however, not for the conception of the idea. It should be obvious that no one who wants to see the three candidates elected would intentionally create a situation which could be injurious to them. That would be ridiculous. I can only hope that now the Chronicle will correct its misrepresentations misrepresenta-tions and make full use of the fuU information in as prominent place as Destruction NOT Imminent Editor: John Charles Bernhardt's articles predicting the "unnecessary deaths of millions of persons" are being published with fanfare in the Chronicle. I hope no one takes them any more seriously than I do. I would like to challenge Bernhardt Bern-hardt to explain his allegation of "the current reign of terror, sadism sad-ism and brutality in our child and juvenile institutions from coast to coast," published in the 15 April issue of the Chronicle. Has he, perhaps, been incarcerated in juvenile juv-enile institutions from coast to coast and thus gained first hand knowledge? He should be able to furnish the Chronicle readers with the name and address of at least one (or more) such institution where "terror, "ter-ror, sadism and brutality" are taking' tak-ing' place, so that I can go there to observe the inhumanities for myself. my-self. I would rather see these things for myself, because I strongly strong-ly suspect that if Mr. Bernhardt saw such things, it was in a picture (on a Rorschach card). Robert W. Christensen All The Way Editor: You are correct in your editorial entitled "Non-student Huddlers," but you have only gone part way. It would be unfair to single out the Huddle as a place where non-students could not use the University Food Services. Non-students also frequent the cafeteria, Panorama Room and the Commons. ID would have to be checked here also. During the year the University Food Service is also involved in special luncheons and dinners in the ballroom. By checking ID at all of these places we could assure the taxpayers that the University is not abusing its sales tax privileges. It might even result in the Union becoming a student Union again. Frank R. Kiesy Come On-Give Up Editor: The people who are stealing the Chronicle should take account of the shameless way they have been carrying on. These lawless protest against the appointment and reappointment re-appointment of Ralph Mabey (and the expected right turn in the editorial edi-torial policy), is accomplishing nothing except perhaps making the Are You Worth It? Editor: It appears that the Election Committee Com-mittee seems to be wondering why the dorm students don't turn out to hear the candidates platforms. Maybe this brief explanation will help them understand. Many of the dorm residents are just sick and tired of hearing candidates time and time again make unfulfilled unful-filled promises to the RHA. ASUU pays little attention to us until election time, and then all the candidates want our support. You show us more consideration during your terms of office and we'll give you more support when the time comes. You all want our votes, but when we asked to have voting booths put up here we were refused. You ought to know from experience that the majority of students don't go out of their way to vote, but if the facilities are available there is a larger percentage of participation. participa-tion. Marilyn Edgar |
