....

Seventy-Seven Years of Editorial Freedom
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

ROGER RAPOPORT:
Why the Eonomics Bldg. I1111 Years Old

,. ..-.., r....,,-

4

r _

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MiCH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

..........,, :::.:.....::: ....... ...,....,........ .. ":.:"..., ,. '..t.{}.w...i.}..:..1"{":: ^..}.4NL .".1T.}:1: .1V."1: ::}:Si:.ti . S+ :,^ 1,,..;ti:.;;;,, ;:: .Y,^ , ;w,;:?, ;.;,;.; . ~ , ' ;;; : :fi r s: Y'ifi . ':, ' ' ".z' '+., ^ st '," ' ,

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1967

NIGHT EDITOR: LUCY KENNEDY


Public Broadcasting Corp.:
An Oasis in the Wasteland

THOSE WHO BEMOAN the low level of
entertainment on American television
may soon see a ray of light streaking
through the darkness over our "vast
wasteland." The source of this hope is
the new Corporation for Public Broad-
casting, a non-profit organization, fund-
ed by government and private capital
whose purpose is to raise the general
level of television culture.
Approval of the corporation will go be-
fore the House of Representatives in the
next few weeks where it is bound to face
a major roadblock over its funding. A
penny-conscious Congress has already cut
the suggested $100 million for the cor-
poration to a mere $9 million for the first
year.
But this is not the end of the CPB's
problems. All proponents agree that they
do not want the corporation to rely on
annual congressional appropriations that
will make it dependent on the whims of
politicians.
The alternative plans for funding,
which would provide CBP with a steady
source of funds, as well as putting the
cost for the corporation on the shoulders
of those who benefit most, will certainly
meet stiff opposition from strong Wash-
ington lobbies.
The first proposal is put forth by the
Carnegie Institute, which has previously
funded Educational Television experi-
merts. This plan calls for a five per cent
sales tax on TV sets, which would yield
$100 million annually and also raise the
money from the consumer benefiting
from the improved viewing material.
Another proposal would place a fee
on commercial broadcasting stations bas-
ed on their advertising revenues. Com-
mercial stations are obviously against this
because of the financial drain on their
current operations and their fear that
making CPB too strong will raise un-
wanted competition.
The networks, however, can gain a
great deal from a strong CPB. Not only
will the competition press them to im-
prove the quality of their programs, but
The Daily is a member of the Associated Press and
Collegiate Press Service.
Fall and winter subscription rate: $4.50 per term by
carrier ($5 by mail); $8.00 for entire year ($9 by mail).
Daily except Monday during regular academic scbool
year.
Dally except Sunday and Monday during regular
summer sessinn.
Second class postage paid at Ann Arbor. Michigan.
420'Maynard St. Arn Arbor. Michigan, 48104.
Editorial Staff
ROGER RAPOPORT, Editor
MEREDITH EIKER, Managing Editor
MICHAEL HEFFER ROBERT KLIVANS
City Editor Editorial Director
SUSAN ELAN .. ...... Associate Managing Editor
STEPHEN FIRSHEIN....Associate Managing Editor.
LAURENCE MEDOW .. . Associate Managing Editor
RONALD KLEMPNER ..., Associate Editorial Director
JOHN LOTTIER ... Associate Editorial Director

it will serve as a testing and spawning
ground for new talent and ideas, which
can then be instituted to benefit the
whole industry. Creative talent and ideas
often find it hard-going in the high pric-
ed, profit oriented world of commercial
broadcasting.
THE FINAL PROPOSAL-and the one
that will probably be the best for both
ETV and commercial broadcasting com-
bined-would be to initiate a domestic
satellite system and finance the CPB
through money saved by broadcasters us-
ing the satellite system instead of current
cables of the common-carriers. Broad-
casters presently spend $200 million an-
nually for using common-carriers' cables.
A satellite system would only cost aroundI
$40 million for present levels of use, and
it thus represents an 80 per cent saving.
Presently, however, the only corpora-
tion that is licensed to establish such a
system is COMSAT Corp., and the com-
mon-carriers hold a controlling interest
in its voting stock. The lobbyists for com-
mon-carriers like AT&T and IT&T seem
too strong to be overridden by the CPB
or the public interest.
Until Congress can break the roadblock
established by powerful communications
interests, the public will have to stick
with its current fare of moronic come-
dies and old Ronald, Reagan reruns.
-RONALD KLEMPNER
Associate Editorial Director
No Comment
Department
"T HE IDEA of an electronic cletectioni
barrier across the neck of Vietnam
will probably never get beyond the talk-
ing stage. Top army officials privately ex-
press their coolness to a proposed barrier
to run 43 miles across the Demilitarized
Zone and perhaps another 100 miles
across neighboring Laos. Their main ob-
jection: it would take an estimated $3
billion to install the minefields, laser,
sesmic, acoustic and other anti-infil-
tration devices-and some 250,000 troops
to patrol the barrier. Even then, the
generals say, "The barrier could be
breached and spoofed. The Viet Cong
would have the alarm bells ringing all
the time."
-NEWSWEEK Magazine, Sept. 4, '67
In issue dated Sept.-11
"Secretary of Defense Robert S. Mc-
Namara announced yesterday that an!
anti-infitration barrier, equipped with
barbed wire and electronic eyes and ears,
will be stretched across South Vietnam: ."
-ASSOCIATED PRESS, Sept. 6, '67

IF YOU'VE SEEN the back of the Ann Arbor phone
directory recently, you may have noticed that there
is a Sesquicentennial display which features a number
of landmark buildings in University history including
the Chemical Laboratory, "one of the first of its kind
in the country." It was built in 1856.
The caption does not point out, however, that today
the facility is the 111-year-old Economics Building,
which is one of the worst of its kind in the country. I'm
not particularly worried that the fire marshall con-
demned the building in 1943, but when I have class
there every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, from 11
a.m. to noon I usually wind up with a knee in my
back. The benches are less than half a foot apart and
the tall guy behind me has no leg room.
LIKE THE REST of the students and faculty here I'm
making an involuntary sacrifice for the administration's
current effort to preserve its autonomy. Part of the rea-
son why my class is cramped is that the University has
refused to take state money to begin construction on $28
million worth of new buildings. The University argues
that it doesn't want to let the state supervise building
construction as required in Public Act 124. And the ad-
ministration is in court trying to get exemption from
Public Act 379, which requires it to bargain collectively
with unions.
However laudable autonomy may be it is hard to get
excited about either fight, for both these struggles appear
to be only in the narrow interest of the administration.
And in both cases, the administration itself is not bear-
ing the burden of the struggle.
While I'm still waiting for a new classroom building
to get off the drawing board, a brand new six-story ad-
ministration building is nearing completion, financed
by $2.9 million in student fees. It replaces the old admin-
istration building that was built in 1948.
In other words, the sacrifice for autonomy is not
being made by the administration but by the rest of us.

After all, there aren't any administrators taking eco-
nomics this fall.
Turning to the more immediate autonomy-related
confrontation, it is even more difficult to be sympathetic
with the administration.
According to Executive Vice-President Marvin Nie-
huss, Public Act 379 is being challenged (in the state
courts) because "it is part of a pattern of erosion of the
University's autonomy."
And he adds, "The constitutional autonomy of the
University goes back a century, has been reiterated in
two constitutions and confirmed in court decisions. Ero-
sion of autonomy means undermining the position of the
University as an educational institution."
ALL THIS BEGS the question. Autonomy is simply a
political rallying cry designed to' obscure the fact that
the University doesn't want to bargain collectively with
unions because it could be expensive and cause strikes.
This is the only university in the state that won't
bargain collectively with unions. The school is even
ignoring the advice of Governor Romney's labor fact-
finding panel which recommended that the school should
bargain. (The panel's chairman was Prof. Russell Smith
of the University Law School.)
The ironic thing about this stand is that the admin-
istration is clamoring to maintain its autonomy in two
areas where it has failed miserably on its own. A simple
look out the back door of the administration building
reveals half a dozen styles of architecture. As a Wash-
ington Post reporter put it this summer, "The campus
is so ugly. All the buildings look like old, post offices."
Maybe, it wouldn't be such a bad idea to have the state
supervise selection of architects and supervise building
planning as stipulated in P.A. 124.
As for the non-union plant department, it is notor-
iously inefficient. The journalism department tells of a
bid of $500 to simply relocate a portable partition and a
phone conduit. The plant department wanted over $30

to place a night lock on a campus office when an out-
side contractor was willing to do it for half the price.
Certainly unionization won't hurt anything and it might
improve morale.
THEORETICALLY, AUTONOMY for a major univer
sity is a sound idea. The campus should be a place
sheltered from the political winds (and hot air') that
jeopardize academic freedom.
But in practice, autonomy has become simply a con-
venient device for challenging some laws that the con-
servative administration doesn't like. When the Uni-
versity's autonomy is really at stake in the crucial area
of academic freedom, the University never tries to chal-
lenge the law.
For example, when the House Un-American'Activities
Committee came to the University in August, 1966, and
subpoenaed the names of 65 student and faculty leaders
of left wing groups, the administration did not refuse on
the grounds that it would be "an infringement on the
University's constitutional autonomy."
Instead, Vice-Presidents Richard Cutler and Allen
Smith turned in the names (without getting permission
from the students or faculty) explaining "Compliance
with lawful subpoenas is the normal operating procedure
of the University."
The University bowed to the same kind of pressure
in 1954 when it fired two leftist professors who declined
to answer HUAC questions.
Most recently the University has made no effort to
help protect the rights of an English instructor and three
students who were arrested In January, 1967, for showing
an "obscene motion picture" at Cinema Guild.
Perhaps this is why no one is listening when the
administration cries that the current "illegal work stop-
page" of University employes is an effort to force the
University to sacrifice autonomy and knuckle under. For
it is now clear that the old autonomy claim is more of a
facade than a stand.

I

I

Letters:* SGC Speaks With Acid Tongue

To the Editor:
S A FRESHMAN with two
weeks at the University, I
view Student Government Coun-
cil as an organization with a dour,
jaundiced attitude toward every
faction' of adversity with which it
must deal. I might compare it to
an old man with a stodgy, sour
outlook on life, or with a person
suffering from chronic indiges-
tion, bubbling constantly with a
cer'tain acidity.
A young lady from SGC, a Vice-
President as I recall, spoke to us
about the organization during
summer orientation. She did a
fine job of projecting the attitude
I have mentioned above to our
entire orientation group. I felt
then and there that there was
was definitely something wrong
with either this great pillar of ed-
ucation which I was entering or
with SGC. (I now know that there
are faults in each.)
I realize that this attitude must
stem from a certain discourage-
ment in dealing with a bureau-
cracy, but I also have come to the

conclusion that it has fostered a
like retaliatory disposition on the
part of the administration, Vice-
President Cutler coming to mind
immediately as a prime example.
I realize that SGC has line
ideals, and fine projects with
which it plans to implement these
ideals, but I think that in the im-
age it sets forward, in the brash
yet sour attitude it takes, or at
least exudes, in its dealings, it
alienates the people it hopes to
influence, and therefore is com-
pelled to seek its ends through
force (demonstrations, et al), ra-
ther than through logical commu-
nication.
I think too that SGO, in its
dealings, fails to consider that the
people on the other side must
have certain limits on their ability
to "g i v e" certain obligations
which may not be compromised at
the time, and I do not refer to any
obligations to the Selective Serv-
ice System, to the Federal Gov-
ernment as a research financier,
or to any other wielder of such
powers, but merely to conscience

and to obvious decisions which it
feels are in the best interests of
the students.
FINALLY, I THINK SGC en-
joys its inherent power to act as
a rabble rouser, and glories in this
technique, manifested in various
ways. I also think SGC basks in
a martyr complex, as a persecuted
but gallantly fighting warrior for
the "rights of men". There may
be nothing wrong with this, but I
feel SGC uses it as good reason
(i.e. an excuse) for brashness in
dealing with the administration
and loud cries of foul whenever its
demands are not met.
I think it feels that, as the stu-
dents' martyr, their long-suffer-
ing mediator with the administra-
tion, it is obliged to cry out loudly
at the least little injustice. It pre-
sents to me an example of both
bad taste and bad judgment in
these outcries, when it purports
to be a calm, adult body.
In closing, may I say that I feel
no hostility, no disaffection to-
wards SGC, but rather concern for

the way it goes about executing
its plans and its ultimate chances
for success.
--George J. Rusch '71
Boycott Boycott
To the Editor:
T HE INTER-HOUSE Assembly
took a giant step backward in
their Sept. 11 meeting, They ask-
ed the students, in diormitories
"not to aid in breaking the sym-
pathy walkout against the Uni-
versity residence halls. Under the
guise of student power or some
other vague concept, the IHA is
actually asking the residents of
East Quadrangle to eat on paper
plates. Under the guise of student
belief in human rights, they had
this writer come to class late be-
cause of the long lunch lines,
which were in turn caused by the
strike.
Now the residence halls are try-
ing to employ students to do some
of these jobs to alleviate these
problems. The negative response
of the IHA is very disappointing

to say the least. Lee us hope, for
the sake of the students living in
residence balls, if not for the sake
of the IHA, that the IHA boycott
is ignored.
-Robet Agree '71
Windows
To the Editor:
JHAVE SOLVED a mystery. The
strange windows in the, ugly
new Administration Building are
in reality gun slits, reminiscent of
those found in certain stout for-
tresses. Perhaps our administra-
tors are better prepared for the
Revolution than we think .
0', to abandonmy facetious tone,
maybe they are just afraid of
light.
--Ron Pratt
All letters must be typed,
double-spaced and should be no
longer than 300 words. All let-
ters are subject to , editing;
those qver 300 words will gen-
erally be shortened. No unsign-
ed letters will be printed.

I

........:. !ll ................................................. ..........:::.......: .......r. . :.'.';:lA .V.".'l:: l::.Vf: V::l.: . :t {:1;::.:.....'.:........t'".: .:'.'1::....... ...r ........1..... r.. .
.......f:"r.^: f!!:!!!!.".'N:fN:i.:1::. !!. !' :'.::"tiY::N::,;l.}}"!!f!: """" ....: 5M1".: r"Y ""!'rNYN
.............J!!!:l:.:: f:..:.'.'f::l::::l:. .":. :::::::1.'l:l:::l.:::::f::l:::..5: !!.^...............f::f i.::: .............. ..................... .l ...................... ............... .i f.... ..." ... .l:Jf. {"}:": . . ... . . f J::! :"rJf ...... ... ..."...... ........", "... ....
..........J ...... ................vJ...":: n::: }'.tfl: a :r:,{,..vmx.: :."; riiA Y" ere 'ro .". ' i A ?'.". pr} ':'vt', ,M1''} :.'':'.. t yJ"r'i' :vJ 'r: r',,hdf Y}'''?;i'r . ..rM, +i9t .'7.
............. r::.n.... ,..S.afP>.R"::}}.,:{e.< :%iA.. ...f: '"vv.:.. . .r:v':. $:fwro . n r .. .}"
u bou trotot s ""t"i*n'd
l

i
I
i
i
E
i
I
#i
I
i
i
4
t
7
f

By AVIVA KEMPNER
A RAID on a blind pig in De-
troit's 12th Street area prov-
ed to be the shot heard 'round the
world in the summer of 1967. But
to the residents of that troubled
district, the .much - publicized
nightspot represented more than
its shabby surroundings suggest.
Bill Scott, an inhabitant of
that now famous area, has strong
opinions and important insights on
the subject. And he should know,
because his father was responsible
for running that after hours
drinking spot, where Scott work-
ed as a doorman this past summer.
"Blind pig is a horrible name,
because it indicates something fil-
thy to the general public. I would
appreciate if you used the word
speakeasy instead," he asked.
Scott traced the history of the
establishment back to election
time in 1965 when an organization,
United Community for Civic Ac-
tion, was formed, mostly by Ne-
groes in an effort to back candi-
dates. The politicians running for
office, especially judges, supported
the office, paying for the litera-
ture, rent and other expenses.
The headquarters were situated
over the Economy Printing Co. on
12th Street, where UCCA could
work closely with the Negro pop-
ulation.
"My dad was told by the politi-
cians," explained Scott, "to hold
onto this good location when poli-
tical activity was slow, even if
it meant running a speakeasy."
SPEAKING FONDLY of the
speakeasy, Scott tried to convey
his personal feelings and discredit
newspaper accounts about it.
"It was a swinging place for
fun! People from all walks of life
came there. No soliciting or mari-
juana-pushing was done there.
Louis Lomax was wrong when he
wrote that the speakeasy con-
sisted of a corrupt society." He
also criticized Lomax for "writing
about a city he did not even live
in or know anything about."

to the hospital. I was treated hor-
ribly. My legs and hands were
handcuffed, though I was in much
pain. When I asked the guard to
remove them he replied 'sorry, but
regulations'.
"My lawyer could not find out
where I was taken. I spent three
weeks at the Belle Isle bathhouse
where I was treated pretty well,"
Scott admitted. His case was final-
ly dismissed because of insufficient
evidence.
SCOTT HAS HIS OWN theories
about the riots. He suggests that
they were completely reactionary,
not organized. The raid on his
father's speakeasy touched off an
event which would have happened
sooner or later. "Mayor Cavanagh
made promises but could not keep
them, so the people became dis-
couraged," he said.
"Not only do we have the poor-
est housing but also the worse op-
portunities for jobs. The people
who hustle-the pushers, pimps,
and whores-are the ones making
the living in this area. A working
job for a white man would not
bring in as much money nor allow
the Negro to move up."
"The police crackdown of such
establishments as the speakeasy
ind illegeal practices like prosti-
tution and gambling hit at' the e
vey existence of the Negro. And
with these hustlers being arrested
more often, they are losing their'
only source of income."
TO SCOTT, VIOLENCE and the
separation of the black and white
communities are not the answers.
He admitted that he did not gain
this insight until after he saw the
destruction and waste produced
by the riot. The burning of his
house especially affected him.
His immediate concern is raising
money for a constructive program,
the Ann Arbor tutorial project,
which he is coordinating in De-
troit Scott feels his own experi-

~4


in the newspapers were wrong," called. "I even threw a bottle at "The next day we lived on the
Scott insisted, one, and then went looting." buses in the parking lot of pre-
He contradicted police reports "I did crazy things like giving cinct headquarters. We were treat-
that the occupants of the speak- away the beer left in the speak- ed like dirt. We were not 4dlowed
easy were taken out peacefully. easy to anyone I saw on the to go to the bathroom, and instead
"Some people refused to leave and street, while reminding them used the area around the bus. But
were dragged out after the occur- where it came from," he continued what really angered me is that
rence of a few fights." to boast. "I also 'stood up on a the 'peckerwoods' would not let
Scott returned to close up the litter box and directed traffic." the one woman on the bus use
establishment after the raid. He "Finally I went home during the bathroom. I still can't forget
said that the police had done the day to sleep. I was awakened that lack of decency."

4

some wrecking of their own, like
crashing the jukebox. He denied
that looters could have done the
damage, since the place was for
them.

because the house was on fire.
The firemen tried at first to put
it out, but then just let it burn.
And I didn't see people stoning
the fire denartment"

AT THE CITY JAIL Scott was
not allowed to make a telephone
call because he was told that the
city was under marshal tlw which

=1 ,

I