OCR Text |
Show Higher up Editor: As one who's name has been associated with "confrontation politics" concerning ASUU's Athletic allotment, I would like to make the following remarks. Obviously I was dissapointed in the Assembly's rejection of the bill which listed the stipulations to be met by Athletics if they were to accept the student funds, but I was more dissapointed in the following vote which may be interpreted by students, faculty, administration, etc. as a complete encorsement of our Athletic program. By voting to give Athletics $240,000 without a position paper attached, the Athletic Department, Administration, Ad-ministration, State Board, and any other agency who is questioned about Athletics may turn to the vote of last Thursday to prove that the students of this university want to give Athletics $5 per quarter because their representatives representa-tives vqted that way. Indeed the Assembly does not think (I hope) that the students want to give this money but instead voted for the $240,000 because many felt that there was no choice since the final fi-nal decision comes from the "higher ups". I feel that even if the "higher ups" do have the final decision (and they do in this case), the Assembly should pass only those positions that they truly feel represent the students or it will be guilty of the misrepresentation mis-representation of student opinion of which the Chronicle has accused ac-cused them. Assembly members should vote as a reflection of the students in their college, not as a reaction to the power of the "higher ups." Assemblyman Bob Curtis Doesn't want Moore Editor It's a shame that Keith Moore (whoever he is) has exhibited his stupidity by implying that members of the male sex are "born to edit" while women can't even acquire that ability through education. As a female graduate student of journalism I object to this attack. If I felt that a man, merely by virtue of his sex, was automatically able to edit I'd have given up a long time ago. A few years ago I found myself the first female editor of a .college paper in a'nother state. The paper received higher ratings than it had in 15 years, despite the fact that I, a mere woman, was editing it. Now a male has the the editorship and is doing an equal job, if not better. I've been working in professional journalism in Washington D.C. for three years now and it is evident to me that anyone, whether male or female, does only as good a job as his or her interest, ability and education allow. If the field of journalism is dominated by men it is not because they make better editors. I feel sorry for Keith Moore, but at the same time I'd like very much to punch him in the nose. LynetteJ. Eastland Fit of survival Editor: Without the "methodical rape of the wilds around us" by early pioneers, perhaps "we offspring" would not be around today criticizing their choice of survival m preference to aesthetic appreciation ap-preciation of nature. After reading Wednesday's editorial I too must agree that perhaps our pioneering forefathers should have opted for aesthetic appreciation. ap-preciation. At least then, our eyes and intelligence would not have been insulted by Wednesday's anachronistic criticism of a previous culture based on today's values. ' . Possibly iustrious edjtor.al staff could more accurately Portray the pioneer attitude toward nature by enumerating and comparing the number of trees in the Salt Lake Valley in 1847 and 1971. M.D. Sampson Position defended Editor: Enough is enough! Editorial freedom is a guaranteed right of the press, but capricious misrepresentation is not. The time has come for setting the record straight on ASUU's handling of the Athletic funds, and Dan Steggell's slanting of the facts. Pete Sorensen and myself feel a defense of our voting record and the Assembly's integrity in-tegrity is necessary. To begin with, the vote taken during the last ASUU Assembly meeting has been presented by Mr. Steggell as a "sell out." He simply misses the issue. The appropriation of ASUU funds to Athletics was approved only after: 1) approval in Athletic Board that in the future students will be allowed to aid in drawing-up drawing-up the Athletic Budget, that the Athletic accounting books will now be open to the ASUU President and Finance Board, and that beginning in 1972 a line item budget request will be presented to the ASUU Assembly for the Athletic allotment 2) a special task force was set-up to report on the future role of Athletics at the U 3) approval by Instil Council of the fundir. Cheerleaders ($2000), I' ($2000), and Pep Band : come out of this year's A' Apportionment, and theft, reassurement that those only things that could be' this year 4) research revealf to gain any control over! Funds approval from H Board of Higher Educawr sets the fee) was new recognition that m Financial Policies and' dures, past student gov obligated us to a "t" notification of fee ch on the Athletic fa binding 6) the assurg. Administration and Councel that going proper channels was for our control orpa-w'1 of the $5.00 fee. The proper first step is J student input to government. This , complished in the student referendum ; fees. Everyone if opportunity to positively constructive. Dave Hansen, P: Chairman Pete Sorensen, fin" Chairman |