OCR Text |
Show T II E TWO DIXIE SUN December 4, 1959 Editorials From Other Schools CONTROVERSY THE PRESENT ATTITUDE at Dixie seems to be one of avoiding controversy and criticism. This is evidenced by the reactions to the league, to the letter to the editor criticizing assemblies, and to any differing opinions. The people are satisfied, lets not get excited! are reactions I have heard. Lets not kick the sacred cows! anti-footba- ll In my opinion there are too many sacred cows here at Dixie and I hereby kick all of them: not just to be oppositional, but to say that nothing should be so sacred that we cant detach ourselves personally from it and objectively evaluate it for its worth. Ed. Note: The following are excerpts from editorial pages at California Western University in San Diego and Utah State University in Logan. We think they are comments worth bring to the attention of Dixie students. Editor: The students of Sacramento State College were very concerned with the directive issued by President Clark Kerr of the University of California on October 22, 1959, concerning student organizations and controversial issues. The Student Council issued the following statement about this directive which we felt you would be interested in looking over. Whereas, the free participation in controversial issues is absolutely necessary to the process of higher education; and Whereas, free expression can only be maintained if students are allowed the right to organize for the purpose of discussion and political action upon controversial issues; We the Associated Students of Sacramento State College deplore the recent administrative directive by President Clark Kerr of the University of California concerning student groups taking positions on political, religious, economic, international or other issues. We offer to our fellow students at the University of California our moral support in their current fight against this directive. We feel that this concerns all institutions of higher learning and we sure you feel the same way and will take appropriate action. ' HONEST CRITICISM is healthy. It stimulates thinking and progress. Is change so bad? What is so wonderful about the status quo that we so desparately cling to it and resist any attack? If it is wonderful and good and beautiful and true, then we should be able to defend it on an intellectual and impersonal level and not bring it down to a subjective, personal level. DAVE WILLIS, Secretary-Treasure- r, Associated Students, Sacramento State College Do you have to print it? This is strange music to a newspaper persons ears. His job is to gather and print the news and he can't understand anyone wanting it otherwise. Conversely, it seems the average person is frustrated and amazed that things which "we would rather not have printed are printed, and often given top play. The newspaperman, trained to report the news, often doesnt even consider that there might be a view opposing the publishing of certain of news, until he knocks his head against a no comment wall a A characteristic of the uneducated is the attitude of per- types times. lew sonalizing all issues. This attitude makes such a person the AND THE average person, untrained in thinks only that implacable enemy of critics. He carries his personal dislike he is protecting his own and others rights reporting, by withholding certain inof being criticized into the public arena. Instinctively he wil formation. the past few weeks STUDENT LIFE has printed a number of always favor the status quo, for he likes to keep everything newsInstories that many would rather have received by rumor than in running snugly in accustomed grooves. black and white. The problem could easily be an issue throughout the campus year. The uneducated have no intellectual support for their Therefore, the studentbody deserves to at least know LIFES position on the matter. opinions, and so cannot defend them rationally against adIN 1734 a New York acquitted a newspaper man, John Peter versaries who argue on the basis of facts and ideas, so they Zenger, charged with libel jury for printing facts unfavorable to New Yorks stoop to personal vilification. To him the critics action, if British governor. Before this decision, it was customary to convict anyone of libel not outright treason, is at least suspiciously close to disloyalprinting anything unfavorable about a person in public office the truth for which the attacker must be punished: If you dont of the matter ty, notwithstanding. like it here, why dont you go somewhere else? BUT JENGERS acquittal underscored an important concept in American journalism. As the Brigham Young University Universe recently pointed out (the same problem has shown itself at BYU): The people have a right to to know when things may be fouled up ARE WE typical of the uneducated? There is evidence that we have some of these characteristics. It should be the as well as when things are godng peachy ginger. objective of the students, student officers, teachers, and administrators to overcome these attitudes in order to stimto ulate growth and development. If it appears that we who criticize are merely negative, then lets take a positive atti- Dear Sirs: Two weeks ago I wrote a letter tude. Lets be for better assemblies. Lets be for higher acato your paper in which I did not demic standards and properly-place- d values. Lets be for pro- sign my name. This week I was gression. But lets think and do, not avoid! forced to realize how high the price Letters of anonymity can be. I specifically did not sign that letter so it could be objectively examined for its merits, and not used for a personal attack upon the author. Now I JoAnn Lee STAFF OF TIIE DIXIE SI A by the studentbody of Dixie College realize how wrong I was. I would like to use the rest of Kdltor of myself and Campus Editor .... Ihurejdafen my letter in defense letter. The author of my Sports Editor previous w?nTiE?plil! ZZZZZZZ7 o n 1 Kxohan f e the letter of Nov. 24 has asked V Business ...ZZ.ZZZZ.ZZ.ZZ..ZZ'.' ''fi ' n KrusThto!' what relationship I have had with Reporters i Ruth Ann liafen, Kathleen' iVi.:i kp.'Hon n ie KrPH - ' previous Dixie assemblies. In reply atsy Dever, I.ida Brooks. Kay Bruhn, Mel Reisner I would like to state that last Brown, Tom Bjorndal, all class and club reporters year Sports writers! Durant McArthur. Merrill Webb I was a commissioner of amusehnenlty Advisers Reed Blake. ments for the freshmen class, and as such had a seat upon the assembly committees. This committee as you all know formulates policy for all assemblies produced at Dixie Drug Dixie along with producing several of its own. I have undoubtedly I had more personal relationship with When Your Doctor assemblies than any junior in this Zioose from our famous institution. Prescribes, Take Your I nowhere in my previous letter names as Prescription To Dixie Drug compared our assembly with teleor the movies. My main obPykettes, Catalina, Bobby vision jection to assemblies was their Brooks, Van Heusen, Prompt, Efficient Service j quality and conflict with actual education. Indeed we cfannot atshoes Levies; for Is a Specialty j campus tempt to compete with professional wear talent, but we also cannot afford to compete with education. A I happily concede to my literary publlahad -- 1 Center Department Store (.1 the Editor opponents point that the best one has to offer is reason for applause, but it still is no excuse for mediocrity. ' Applause does not increase ones grade point average or produce intercontinental missiles. I advanced in my last letter, and one which Miss Blake seems to overlook, is that our assemblies this year are not equal in value to an hour in class. This idea is my sole opinion, and one to which I am entitled, as she is to hers. But when a person uses his opinion to attack, neglecting obvious fact and basing his attack upon personal prejudices, his purpose is I did not propose the abolishment of assemblies, as anyone who read the last paragraph of my letter could tell. I realize their entertainment value, but in this case educational value is paramount. I have tried not to this letter upon mv beliefs, place but upon certain evident truths. I have tried to defend myself factually and not upon my beliefs. I offer this letter in the same spirit of thought as the last: that of genuine, constructive, intelligent criticism. An educational institution should strive to achieve this very thing. When the of such thought becomes instigator a victim of the faculty and their obsequious siphants wrath, it makes one wonder whether the institution can cal! itself an educational one. RICHARD FRF I |