100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

September 04, 1968 - Image 8

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1968-09-04

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Page Eight

THE MICHIGAN DAILY

Wednesday, September 4, 1968

PageN" E , Ight THE MICHIGNDAIL

Complete
The following is the complete text of the Interim Report of
the Committee on Communications Media, which represents a
one-year study of The Daily's operations.
Members of the committee were:
-Prof. Robert C. Angell of the sociology dept.
-Miss Judith A.Greenberg, Grad
-Alden Klovdahl, Grad
-Dean Charles F. Lehman of the education school
-Prof. Ben L. Yablonky of the journalism dept.
-Prof. L. Hart Wright of the Law School
Prnf. Wright acted aschairman of the committee

text

of

media

committee's

A&

At

interim .

i 1 V1 . 1i "l4 W44riCi [4D {i11OL11 ill

INTERIM REPORT
I. Introduction
This committee, created in
September ;1967 by the. Faculty
Assembly, was charged with the
"responsibility. for studying the
media of communications now
employed on the campus." The
charge included specific mention
of two questio'ns: (i) "whether
existing media are adequate or
new channels of communication
are desirable," and (ii) with re-
spect to the agencies governing
and operating the media, whether
their .,"existing organizational
structure . . . and their relation-
ships to each .other and to the
University community are appro-
priate or can be improved."'
The Assembly further prescribed
that the committee be composed
of four xmember of the University
Senate and two members of the
student body-one of whom was
to be appointed by the Student
Government Council and the
other by the Graduate Assembly.
The six duly appointed mem-
hers sought first to obtain a pre-
liminary overview covering the
existing structure, contemplated
functions, and relationships of
all the principal on-campus mass
communications media. These
media included several publica-
tions (University Record other
less frequently published letters
or reports from senior admini-
trative officials to large segments
of the University community, and
the Michigan Daily) as well as
two radio stations (WCBN and
WUtM).
The overview thus obtained
convinced the committee that
within the single academic year
(1967-68) during which both its
student members expected to be
on campus, a' thorough study
could be completed only with re-
spect to on-campus needs regard-
ing published mass media. And
it is to these needs.that this in-
terim report is directed.
Most of the thirty meetings the
committee held during the past
academic year were devoted to
interviews, involving persons who
might be expected to appraise the
communications problem from
different perspectives. Those in-
terviewed included various mem-
bers of, the Board in Control of
Student Publications, two succes-
sive Editors o the Michigan
Daily, three other students.hold
ing less prominent positions on
the Daily; ertain administrative
officers of the University, mem-
bers of the University Senate who
had indicated an interest in talk-
ing to the committee, and repre-
sentatives of some of the twenty-
one student organizations which
were specifically invited to dis-'
cuss' on-campus communications
problems with the committee. Also
interviewed were several well
known' and highly respected pro-'
fessional journalists associated
with the New York Times. Asso-
cated Press, and the Saturday
Review. Additional insight was
obtained from a host of docu-
ments and memoranda, some of
which provided historical per-
spective regarding mass media on
this campus while others dealt
with the organizational and oper-
ating structure, etc., of mass
media on literally dozens of other
campuses. Of value, for example;
.was a pre-publication copy of, a
manuscript, authored by a mem-
ber of Columbia University's Jour-
nalism faculty, which covered
many important facets of col-
legiate newspapers.
The suggestions contained in
this interim report reflect, of
course, the judgments of a com-
mittee. This fact in itself sug-
gests that the exact shape of each
separate proposal is not neces-
sarily responsive. to each indi-
vidual member's own initial pref-

erences. Some of these were com-
promised in arriving at workable
and sensible proposals which each
of us could accept.
I. Central Themes Underlying
the Committtee's Proposals I
central to the committee's pro-
posals are several basic convic-
tions rengrding th snarate cnn-

for the structure and operating
practices of their departments or
colleges. Yet others are interested
also in the total University and,
thus, in both the news and sig-
nificant questions that affect it
whatever may be the ultimate
decision-making process regarding
such questions.

In our view, this broader in-
terest must be encouraged among
a greater proportion of each such
constituency, again irrespective of
the ultimate decision-making pro-
cess for any given matter. But en-
,couraging wider interest in the
whole is not enough, though it is
essential. This is because the more
compelling complementary need,
to encourage the constituencies to
develop a true understanding of
University-wide problems, will be
futile unless sustained by an in-
dividual's personal interest.
This complementary need to
encourage true understanding of
the University's significant prob-
lems could be justified in terms of
its educational function: to en-
courage its constituents to under-
stand the whole world about them.
But actually it also is required in
the University's own self-interest.
This is so not just because stu-
dents become alumni and the lat-
ter do supply the "vital margin"
and must help interpret the Uni-
versity to. their communities. Nor
is it so just because professionally
excellent faculty members who do
establish a personal identification
with the whole University and its
problems are more likely to re-
main here. The University's self-
interest is at stake primarily be-
cause power (oth de facto and
de jure) on this campus is spread
among the constituents in anrex-
tremely complex and often subtle
way. Even students and faculty
members who otherwise appear to
take little active interest in Uni-
versity-wide problems affect the
solutions through their choice of,
and contacts with, representatives
of their respective officially con-
stituted bodies. The indirect role
students and faculty members
play can be felt even on a matter
over 'which their respective rep-
resentative bodies exercise nothing
more than a subtle influence.
However, given the interdepen-
dence of the University's many
facets and its tightly knit fabric,
,these same students and faculty
members often cannot react wise-
ly to a given University-wide
problem unless they understand
the whole University. The exist-
ence of this complication gives
added dimension to the reason!
why the University's compelling
self-interest in having its prob-
lems dealt with wisely requires it
to encourage among its major
constituents wider interest in, and
more complete understanding of,
the whole. Because of the im-
mense size and complexity of this
institution, mass media obviously
must be relied 'upon to help gen-
erate the requisite personal in-
terest and supply the requisite
understanding.
Viewing the presently concerned
members of each constituency as
a separate aggregate, there is no
reason to believe that any one of
these aggregates hopes for any-I
thing other than wise resolu-I
tion of the University's prob-
lems. Even so, however objective
they try to be and though diver-
sity admittedly exists within each,
such constituency, each consti-
tuency initially does tend-when
viewed as a whole-to bring to
bear at least a slightly different
perspective on University-wide'
problems. Thus, if each is to have
a reasonable chance to get at the
"truth," mass communications
media on campus must also as-
sume the obligation to expose,
each constituency not only to the
diverse views of its own members
but also to the perspectives of 'the
other constituents.
-A corollary, to the same end,
is that each of the constituencies1
must be assured of an opportunity
to communicate its own perspec-
tives to the other and in its own
way, that is, in its own unaltered1
words. Otherwise, the ultimate
impact is the same as if its views
urpr hcir n non.,A , A ._ ,

sity-wide interest, has reasonable
access to the facts before it brings
its respective to bear on the prob-
lem. Otherwise, how can the most
conscientious of us avoid unin-
tended distortions or untruths in
our communications?
II
III. Exposure of the Campus
Community to News About
the University and to the
Perspectives of Its Constituents
Introductory note
Until recently, for all practical
purposes the Michigan Daily alone
bore the burden of trying to
communicate to the University's
whole campus family both news
regarding the University and the
views of its diverse constituents.
Needless to say, a variety of cri-
ticisms and tributes regarding the
Daily were brought to our atten-
tion.
Criticisms ranged from the
manner in which it allocates its
space, to editorial biases and dis-
tortions of fact attributed to it.
As to space allocation, it was
suggested, for example, that the
Daily, because of its monopoly
position, was obligated to devote
more space to important news
about each of the various schools
and colleges, of which there are
seventeen. Yet others felt, again
by way of example, that more
space should be devoted to news
about coming special events or en-
tertainments on campus.
No two persons, of course,
would allocate newspaper space to
different subjects in exactly the
same way. Further, if this news-
paper is to be self-sustaining, a
ceiling exists on its news and edi-
torial space, the limitation being
the amount which can be sus-
tained by. advertising revenue.
Currently, the paper itself can-
not afford a significant increase,
at least on a daily basis, in any
one of its major features unless
this is accomplished by reducing
space allotted to other features.
And to rob Peter to pay Paul in
this instance would be a question-
able practice if only because the
most thorough recent independent
sample survey shows that at least
a significant though varying part
of its readership is attracted to
each of those features to which
substantial space is devoted. For
example, though the survey show-
ed that only 36% of the faculty
members who read the Daily us-
ually read its off-campus items
involving national or international
news, the figure among student
readers was 72%. And because of
the costs involved in taking two
newspapers, no doubt many stu-
dent readers rely exclusively upon
this newspaper for daily coverage
of these as well as other matters.
Given this problem, our report
later includes only two suggestions
bearing on space 'allocation, but
neither is calculated to prejudice!
the Daily's financial position.
Anti - establishment biases or
distortions attributed to the Daily,
and said to be directed against
certain student organizations as
well as the administration, were
generally ascribed to the claimed
unrepresentative character of its
staff, about w~hich more is said
below. Proposed cures ranged from
creation of a special subsidy to
encourage more graduate students
to work on the Daily, to creation
of a second competitive newspaper.
Some thought the latter should be
a professional operation spon-
sored by the University itself,
while others contemplated. a sec-
ond student operated newspaper. '
Again, it seems almost trite to
add that no two persons, even if
belonging to the same generation
and constituency, would write a
news story or editorial in an iden-

tical manner. Further, anyone who
has deemed himself familiar with
all relevant facts of a story can,
point to an instance where one or
more of the finest professionally
staffed publications in the land
has been guilty of distortion,
whatever be the reason. Realisti-
cally, as to each of these matters,
one hardly can expect the typical+
collegiate newspaper (manned as
it usually is by undergraduate stu-
dents who can work only part-+
time, and limited as to space) to
match the high quality, say, of,
the New York Times. To expect
otherwise is to argue that such
students have little to learn here
or through experience, that an ex-
tra-curricular effort can produce
the quality attainable from full-
time work, and that a story can
be covered as fully in half a col-
umn as in a whole column.

paper, again if at all energetic, is
more likely than a great commer-
cial newspaper to generate antag-
onism and counter antagonism, to
the prejudice of rationality on all
sides. ;No rule, no structure will
neutralize completely these risks
if first and foremost, in the great-
er interest of seeking truth over a
long period, each of the Univer-
sity's major constituents actually
Iis to- be provided, as we believe
each should, with the opportunity
to communicate its own perspec-
tive in its own way.
Given this, the aims then should
be (i) to accomodate the requisite
opportunities through a structure
that tends not in itself to contri-
bute further to suspicion, and (ii)
to encourage each major constitu-
ent to pursue deliberative prac-
tices that tend to foster careful
analysis while simultaneously re-
flecting dissents within its own
ranks - all in the interest of fos-
tering truth.
Our inquiry warrants one fur-
ther acknowledgement. Whatever
may be the personal view of any
individual member of the Univer-
sity family, attesting to the rela-
tive excellence of the Michigan
Daily-measured against the stan-
dards of its own world-is the fact
that the well known and highly
respected professional journalists
from whom we sought insight be-
lieve the Daily is at least one of
the New York Times' of the col-
legiate world. Awards it has re-
ceived in recent years further sub-
stantiate this off-campus profes-
sional view of the Daily.
It also appears that the Daily
has made a genuine attempt, giv-
en the limitations inherent in a
part-time operation, to use its
more experienced staff members to
train its neophytes. And we ap-
plaud last year's contractual Gar-
rangement pursuant to which the
Daily subjected itself to criticisms
offered by a member of Columbia
University's journalism faculty
who happens to have a keen pro-
fessional interest in collegiate
newspapers.E
Nevertheless, in our view, the
overall mission of communicating
effectively the diverse, carefully
developed perspectives of the pre-
viously mentioned constituents re-
quires serious consideration of
changes proposed below.
.Practices bearing peculiarly on
communication of 'student pers-
pectives.
For reasons previously indicated,
we start with the proposition that
perspectives students bring to bear
on University - wide problems
should be known to all constitu-
ents.
There is, of course, no reason to
assume that a profile of the news
and editorial staffs of the Daily
corresponds to that of the whole
study body. The non-business
staffs typically are composed en-
tirely of undergraduates, the great
majority of whom are enrolled in
the College of Literature, Sciences,
and the Arts, with the preponder-
ence of them tending to major in
just a few departments of that
College. Typically, the senior edi-
tors emerge from these while still
undergraduates, having "worked
their way to the top." Thus, even
a consensus of their views may
not coincide with a consensus of
the whole student body or even of
just those students who do have a
real interest in the total Univer-
sity.
The future includes the prob-
ability that the Daily will contin-
ue to attract primarily persons
with just such backgrounds. This
is because the character of their
particular academic commitment
tends peculiarly either to be com-
plemented by a significant inter-
est in a writing experience for its
values or to reflect a prime inter-
est in the institutional world about
them of which the total Univer-

sity happens to be a part. On eith-
er count, the Daily offers a chance
for involvement.
But this is not to say that the
Daily, as an institution, has ig-
nored the desirability of reflecting
diversified student views, nor
should we discount the great value
of making known the perspective-
'of those students- who have the
type of interest which leads to
their personal involvement on the
Daily.
In the former connection, the
Daily does afford each member of
its editorial staff the opportunity
to write individually signed editor-
ials and, by publishing "Letters to
the Editor," seeks to reflect on a
representative basis such diversity
ps exists in the letters it receives.

the student body. We believe that
both the Student Government
Council and the Graduate Assem-
bly deserve assurance that their
deliberatively evolved positions
will be prominently displayed and
accurately reflected.
Even now, in addition to inter-
pretative articles, the Daily will-
ingly and carefully records in the
"D.O.B." all . resolutions in the
exact form passed by the Student
Government Council, and surely
this is to the Daily's credit. We
propose, however, that this prac-
tice be extended to the Graduate
Assembly. Further, in both cases,
to accord greater emphasis to reso-
lutions involving policy positions,
we propose that these be separated
from ordinary administrative-type
resolutions (for example, SGC re-
solutions approving various events
on campus) by being printed in a
section separate from, the D.O.B.
Another set of suggestions bears
on the work of the Daily's own
staff.
Some people have tended to
treat all individually signed edi-
torials as institutional editorials
of the Daily. In the past, this re-
action lacked justification, for
the Daily-as an institution-has
not tried to control the ultimate
substantive position -expressed in
these individually inspired com-
ments. Nevertheless, such reac-
tions appear to be unavoidable.
Given this, and the desirability in
any event to facilitate use of the
deliberative process in developing
substantive positions on the more
important questions while still ac-
commodating diversity, we suggest
(i) that the Daily itself actually
constitute an Editorial Board con-
sisting of the Editor, Editorial Di-
rector, and one Associate Editorial
Director, (ii) that these three de-
velop collectively and assume col-
lective responsibility for institu-
tional editorials which alone would
be published on the traditional left
side of the editorial page, and (iii)
that the individual views of other
staff members, whether by way of
dissent or involving topics not
covered by the Board, be published
elsewhere on the editorial page
under a -heading such as "Other
Staff Views. "
Of course the Letter-to-the-
Editor's column should be contin-
ued as is, modified only by a com-
mendable practice followed in the
interest of accuracy by the New
York Times. Specifically, we sug-
gest that the letters be dated,
thereby avoiding any misconcep-
tion by readers regarding the par-
ticular point in time when a given
writer actually responded to a giv-
en problem the complexity of
which may have been subject to
rapid change.
Practices bearing peculiarly on
communication of administra-
tion and faculty perspectives,
At the moment, deliberative bo-
dies representing the faculty have
no control over any communica-
tions media other than mimeo-
graph machines. These are suffi-
cient to enable SACUA, the As-
sembly, and University-wide com-
mittees to communicate their
views in their own words to the
faculty itself and to administra-
tive officials. But these> bodies
have no assurance over the years
that their perspectives will be re-
flected in their own way to the
third and largest of the constitu-
encies-the student body. True,
interpretative articles bearing on
many reports of these bodies do
appear in the Daily, and the Daily
has printed some of the reports in
full. But these interpretative arti-
cles are prepared by students; al-
so, it is a student who decides
whether a given faculty report
should be run in full. Further,
while the Daily publishes letters
from each constituency in its Let-

Vr-to-the-Editor column and spe-
cifically solicits articles from f a-
culty members, space limitations
here may preclude publication of
the carefully developed statements
of the faculty's official representa-
tive.
Complementing these means is,
a tentative, informal and not well'
defined understanding that the
administratively controlled Uni-
versity Record ultimately will take
over the function of the now mori-
bund Senate Affairs. The former,
together with the' President's
monthly Letter and the ad hoc Re-
ports 'to the University Commun-
munity, also constitute the media
through which the administration
is' assured of an opportunity to
disseminate its perspective in its
own words. However, the distri-
bution practices of these publica-

ing that proportion of the student
body ever will see the University
Record.
Some have proposed that the
administration assure, exposure of
the whole University family to its
own self-expressed perspectives,
and to those of the faculty, by
publishing a professionally run
newspaper which, in effect, would
compete with the Daily. In short,
it was recognized that, to be suc-
cessful in attracting' actual read-
ership among all segments, the
publication probably would have
to include most of the major- fea-
tures now included in the Daily.
No doubt such a move would be
viewed in many quarters as a cal-
culated and threatening divisive
action. No doubt also, the Daily's
own attitude toward both the fa-
culty and administration would be
adversely affected by the ensuing
competitive struggle for survival.
We believe the proper remedy
points in precisely the opposite di-
rection. The different constituents
should be led, by their common in-
terest in both the University's wel-
fare and the truth, to combine
their resources in a manner which
preserves the Daily's financial in-
tegrity while simultaneously assur-
ing ,that individuals 'who regularly
read the views of one constituency
at least are exposed to the self-
expressed perspectives of the other
constituencies. This can be ac-
complished without impinging in
any way on the cherished and tra-
ditional freedom of the Daily stu-
dent editors.
Specifically, we propose that
there be added to the Daily an in-
sert which carries its own name
and masthead in a manner clearly
indicating that the Daily's student
staff is not in any way responsible
for the insert's content. Among
the various other devices which
might emphasize the separate
character of the insert, we at
least discussed use of a different
kind of type and quality of paper.
A professional journalist, associ-
ated with the University's news
service, would be responsible for
make-up of the insert. The con-
tent would include, by way of sub-
stitution, all matters now covered
in the University Record, the Pre-
sident's monthly Letter, and the
ad hoc Reports to the University
Community, insofar as they bear
on University-wide affairs of com-
mon interest to all of the Univer-
sity's constituents. Further, on the
faculty side, it should be under-
stood that SACUA has the right to
print therein statements originat-
ing with it, full reports of faculty
committees, etc., or summarized
versions thereof-prepared by the
committees in question.
Since it is contemplated that
the Daily, plus the insert, will
serve as the device through which
all of the principal constituents of
the University will expose their
views, not' only to members of
their own respective constituen-
cies, but also to members of the
other constituencies, it is impor-
tant that the combined readership
include, apart from student sub-
scribers, all members of the facul-
ty and elected officials of SGC
and GA.
There is no assurance, of course,
that any given student subscriber
will read any or all of the mat-
ters covered in the insert. Never-
theless, assuming a student has an
interest in the total University, it
is important - both to him and
to the University itself - that he
be given this opportunity and, in
any case, that copy be prepared in
a manner which will tend to gen-
erate and sustain student interest.
Nor can there be assurance that
any given faculty member, even if
provided with a copy, will read
either the 'insert or any or all -of
the news, editorials, and letters
the Daily otherwise prints about
the University. But it is in the

University's own self-interest to
encourage faculty members (and,
indeed, even their sl5ouses) to keep
abreast of University-wide devel-
opments as seen through the eyes
of all of the major constituents.
Accordingly, we propose that the
University itself finance subscrip-
tions for each member of the fa-
culty (instructors and above), .co-
pies of the Daily' to be mailed to'
their respective homes. While this
would assure delivery to each
home on the date of publication,
departments and other units oth-
erwise still would be free to sub-
scribe for copies to be 'delivered on

would be absorbed by the insrt
and precisely when, to accomodte
mechanical or clerical require-
ments, the copy itself would need
to be delivered to the printing
plant.
Finally, it is not our purpose to !
prejudice the financial position
of the Daily. Our sole aim, with
which we cannot believe the Daily
would find fault, is to facilitate,
economically, the opportunity for
the whole University family to be
exposed to the perspectives of all
constituents in the overall interest
of seeking truth and, thus, also in
a manner which will not impinge
on their respective freedoms of ex-
pression. To this end, the Univer-
sity itself should bear such actual
costs as may be incurred in imr!
plementing this overall proposal.
This additional cost may be ac-
commodated at least in part by
the revenue generated by the ad-
ditional subscriptions herein con-
templated. for the faculty, etc. Be
that as it may, no doubt account-
ants representing the University
and the subsequently discussed
board, or an independent accoun-
tant if need be, ,can calculate
both this figure and such other
amount, if any, as may be required
to reimburse the board for actual
costs. incurred by this proposal.
Bulletin board of coming events
It is extremely difficult for per-
sons associated with the Univer-
sity to plan wisely in advance with
respect to the host of especial
events held on this campus. News
about coming special events Is
widely. scattered and incomplete.
The University itself publishes a
University Calendar listing events
sponsored by the University. But
students do not receive this. Cur-
rently also, the Daily-in "Across
Campus"'--records some coming
events. Certain others, such as
lectures and recitals, are listed in
the "D.O.B."
We believe it would be useful to
combine in one publication, avail-
able to all constituents, a "Bulle-
tin Board" 'listing coming events
which are open (whether or not
for an admission price) to more
or less all members of the Univer-
sity family. '
We further propose that this
"Bulletin Board" be published in
the Daily in its Sunday edition,
and that it cover all special events
which will take place during the
ensuing week. We suggest the Sun-
day edition in part because Sun-
day tends to be a "lean" day from
the standpoint of campus news
and in part because student sub-
scribers have a greater amount of
time that day in which to read
the Daily.
The aim is to cover special
events, not regularly recurring
matters such as the topic a given
minister may have for his regular
Sunday sermon.
Finally, the aim Is to serve the
readership, not the sponsoring or-
ganizations. In consequence, list-
ings should not be handled on a
"paid advertising" basis. However,
should the arrAngement .prove to
be burdensome financially, we
would hope the hereinafter men-
tioned board would subsidize the
effort from its other resources.
Clearly we do not anticipate that
the Daily should suffer a drop in
advertising revenue now derived
from sponsoring organizations.
Should such a drop occur, obvious-
ly the plan would require re-ex-
amination.
IV. Board for Student
Publications
Introductory Note
It previously was indicated that
each of the primary constituents
of the University has a great stake
in the campus' primary means of
communication-the Daily. Those
students who devote their time to
the Daily also have a legitimate
interest in its welfare. The inter-

ests of each should be reflected on
the governing board but in a man-
ner that tends not in itself to con-
tribute to suspicion or friction.

1 Kno'w preciseiy noAw mLuen sparse

sent need not be handled, nor is it ten, the Preside
contemplated that it would be for three-year
handled in a manner which would five from the
deny space to news, etc., regularly from alumni, ea
covered in the Daily. Further, the 'appointment for
previously mentioned professional maining three a
journalist and the Daily editors ed for one-year
together can work out the regu- dent body. The
larly recurring point in time when nates the board
the Daily's editors would need to its membership.

nt appoints seven
staggered terms,
faculty and two
ach subject to re-
one term. The re-
re students, elect-
terms by the stu-
President desig-
I's chairman from.

14

The board ought not suffer the
serious handicaps generated by its
own present structure.
Surely proposals previously dis-
cussed demonstrate that we do be-
lieve the administration has a le-
gitimate interest in the campus'
primary means of communiation.
However, to include on the board
the two ex officio members (Vice
Presidents) inevitably embarrass-
es both them and the board's func-
tion. Through no personal fault of
their own, they are entrapped into
what is tantamount to a conflict
of interest.
The plight of the Vice President
for Student Affairs, or of any
counterpart office the University
might create, emerges from the
fact that the Daily focuses sub-
stantial attention on student mat-
ters that come within the juris-
diction of this official. Obviously,
he needs. to be free, in his capacity
as Vice President, to reflect his
own perspectives to the Univer-
sity family (through the previous-
ly proposed insert to the Daily).
But he ought not also be placed in
the embarrassing; role of sitting
on a board whih chooses or con-
trols the promotion of those on
the Daily who are critically ap-
praising the actions or views of
his office. For him to do so inevi-
tably will invite suspicion, both as
to him and the board, and creates
an unnecessary and artificial cloud
on freedom of expressionby the
Daily's writers. It also is conceiv-
able that the Vice President, in his
role as a board member, may bend
over backwards siiply to avoid
the foregoing implications and be
led to vote in a manner which,
while certain to neutralize suspi-
cion, is not truly responsive to his
honestly held convictions. For all
these reasons, this official ought
not be expected to serve on this
board. ,
The same ultimate impact is
suffered in the case of the Vice
President for University Relations,
though the cause is a bit different.
Among this official's many func-
tions is the responsibility to build
an attractive image of the Uni-
versity. While he may try to ac-
complish this with a proper meas-
ure of honesty and candor, the
very title of his office hardly sug-
gests that its prime interest is in
disseminating critical appraisals
of the University. The Daily's mis-
sion, on the other hand, is 'bot-
tomed on free, hopefully objective,
and sometimes critical commen-
tary. Thus, his presence on its
governing board places him,
through no personal fault of his
own, in a fairly inharmonious po-
sition, with all of the consequent
impacts previously ascribed to the
presence of the Vice President for
Student Affairs. For this reason,
it is equally unfair both to this of-
ficial and to the board to expect
him to be one of its members
To minimize the likelihood of
suspicion and undesirable friction
we believe the administration's
own legitimate 'interest in the
principal oncampus media can
best be reflected by the same per-
sons who also reflect the legiti-
mate interest of those students
who personally devote their time
to student publications. Profes-
sional journalists can best repre-
sent the true interests of both,
acting not in a representative ca-
pacity as such, but instead by ref-
erence to their understanding of
the requirements or environment
essential in striving to maintain a
high quality newspaper.
We suggest that the reconstitut-
ed board include three such jour-
nalists, to be named by the Presi-
dent (for staggered terms of three
years, renewable 'once) from a
panel proposed by the three ap-
pointed editors of the Daily acting
jointly with the editors,' respec-
tively, of the Ensian, Gargoyle, and
Generation.

We would hope that one of the
three would have had magazine
experience, and the other two
newspaper experience.
The panel of journalists submit-
ted to the President 'should ,be

-I

t ..

I I~~eqa nia1 size I7pto twrice the nuimbe'r

Not to be forgotten is the fact Further the Daily generally tions differ radically from those of
Furthderetheadailylygenemalhysso-'
that, compared with great com- licits active participation by any the Daily. In consequence, looking
mercial newspapers, a collegiate student. On dccasion it has sped- to the future, there now is dno as-
newspaper-if at all eniergetic- fically encouraged graduate stu- urance that many of the indi-
inevitably runs the greater risk of fclyecuaedgaut t-vidtuals who regularly read the,
ineitaly unsthegreterris ofdents to participate. That it met
generating and sustaining emo- views of one constituency will even
tional reactions on all sides. Com- w e success i ese l r be exposed to the self-expressed
parativelya universi instances is not surprising, givenbexpsdtth slf-prsd
paratively speaking, a university s perspectives of the other two. And
the academic burdens and other
is a very small and intimately in this cuts both ways. Some will;
terwoven world. Thus, in contrast read the University Record, but
to the great commercial newspa- pical graduate student. While we not the Daily; for others, the sit-
pers, a collegiate newspaper which considered the possibility of pro- uation will be reversed. To illus-
focuses significantly on the con- posing a special subsidy to encour- trate, the previously mentioned!
troversial issues of its much small- age graduate students to work on sample survey indicated that 311
- --1nI m il 1 AnaI Anly withfar -the Daily, we were not convinced r. of tefaulyradsthe7

campus, but presumably would The senior editors themselves he is to appoint in any given year.
take a much smaller number of are interested in placing the Daily To illustrate, if in such year only
subscriptions than now. We fur- within the framework of a fully one such appointment is to be
ther propose that the above paid- independent private non-profit made, the panel should consist of
subscription arrangement be ex- corporation which then would rent at least two professional journa-
tended by the University to elected the facilities it now uses. Careful lists. Should the first of these to
representatives and officials of examination indicates that cur- whom the President tenders an
SGC and GA. rently such an arangement does appointment be unable to accept,
We recognize that the Univer- not appear to be financially feas- the editors who made the' nomi-
sity, on occasion, may need to ible. In consequence, we have not nations must substitute a new no-
faculty sought to resolve the editors' pro- minee before the President pro-
communicate with the posal in any ultimate sense. As to ceeds further.
through another medium, but only it, we propose only that when the
with respect to matters in which factual terrainrhas sufficiently We further propose that the fa-
stuent hae n paticlarintr-changed to warrant a full ap- culty's representation be. reduced
students have no particular inter- - from five to three members and,
est. tion, the matter then be consider- thus, be equal in size to the pre-
Also, with respect to the propos- ed with an open mind by a new sent student representation. Also,
ed insert, it should be apparent committee in the lightlof the then to align fact and theory, board
that without some base of exper- existing total facts and needs. members chosen from the faculty
fence we cannnt nredict how much I--------*... _ should be selected from their own

1

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan