I

Seventy-Fifth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

NEWS CONTROL IN VIET NAM:
Making a Mockery of Democracy

I

Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, Micx.
ruth 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.
FRIDAY, 19 MARCH 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: WILLIAM BENOIT

New Faculty Strategy
More Constructive, Effective

HE GOAL OF PROTEST is change, and
popular support is the means of re-
form in a democratic society. For this
reason, the decision by the faculty group
examiiing United States policy in Viet
Nam to stage a "teach-in" has far more
constructive value than their former plan
to cancel classes to demonstrate their
concern.
Prof. Kenneth Boulding was correct in
his analysis that the work stoppage would
bring more attention to the legality of
the professors' methods than to the goal
of the protest. Other faculty members,
some students, University President Har-
lan Hatcher; Gov. Gorge Romney and the
state Legislature were 'among those who
reacted violently to the proposed class
cancellation.
Thus calling classes off would have-
and to an extent already has-obfuscated
the Viet Nam issue and alienated many
people who would otherwise have been in-
Congratulations!
WHETHER WE AGREE or disagree with
those professors who threatened a
teaching strike, University students must
respect their decision to cancel this pro-
posed method -of protest, as well as ad-
mire their sense of strategy.
We must respect their good judgment
because the opposition encountered in
the State Senate would very likely have
been converted into something more
lethal than a condemnation when the
University's budget comes up for review.
Furthermore, this misuse of prerogative
might have led to severe restriction of
the professors' political activity, much as
the federal government limits political
activities of* its employes through the
Hatch Act.
Tactically, however, the move deserves
highest praise. Protsting professors would
have been fighting battles on two fronts
had the original form of protest been
carried out: they would have been forced
to divide their energies between a de-
fense of their method and an attack of
American foreign policy. Now they will
be able to focus on what has been their
primary concern all along.,
So congratulations to those who called
off the teaching strike. This action rep-
resents the mature judgment we expect
of our University's professors. In this
case, discretion certainly was the better
part of valor.
NOW, LET US DEBATE the real issue-
the Democratic administration's poli-
cy in Viet Nam.
-CAL SKINNER, JR.

terested in focusing on U.S. policies in
Southeast Asia. The form of the pro-
fessors' protest would have defeated the
group's whole purpose, which is "to dem-
onstrate that . . . less hazardous alterna-
tives (to the current war) exist."
IN CONTRAST, the "teach-in" which
will be held next Wednesday from
eight in the evening to eight the next
morning will be able to get down to the
real issue instead of dealing with peri-
pheral subjects.
Already the support for the "teach-
in" proves the wisdom of the faculty
group's decision. President Hatcher ex-
pressed his approval of the action in his
convocation yesterday. Presumably out-
standing faculty members who were
agreed with the protesting faculty
group's ends but objected strenuously to
their means will now be able to partici-
pate in the discussions.
Furthetmore, the movement is spread-
ing to other campuses. Prof. Marshall
Sahlins, a member of the faculty group,
said yesterday he had contacted teach-
ers at other college campuses, and the
"reception was initially encouraging" for
staging simultaneous demonstrations
Wednesday evening. He noted that fac-
ulty at Columbia University and the Uni-
versity of Chicago were especially inter-
ested. It is highly doubtful that other
schools would have been so receptive to
the idea of cancelling classes.
IF THE MOVEMENT is publicized
enough, Wednesday could become a
"national focus on Viet Nam day." Cer-
tainly the recent escalation of the war
by bombing North Viet Nam and the
clamp the U.S. has imposed on news
sources warrant serious consideration.
University faculty members represent
an elite of informed individuals. The
chance to listen to them discussing one
of the most pressing issues of the day is
a precious opportunity which should not
be neglected by any thinking student.
If the faculty group gets representa-
tives to present both sides of the fence,
in debate form in addition to in-
dividual speeches, the "teach-in" would
attract many people who want to get a
clearer idea of what is going on in
Southeast Asia. Using such procedures
on campuses across the n a t i o n,
the faculty members can achieve their
goal of activating public concern for the
truth about Viet Nam before the gov-
ernment forces reliance on hearsay and
propoganda as it attempts to shut all
sources of information.
WEDNESDAY SHOULD BE a day to re-
member.
--BRUCE WASSERSTEIN

T HE ISSUE of news manage-
ment, which first developed
during the Cuban missile crisis of
1962, has again appeared with a
lengthy, detailed disclosure by the
Associated Press that the Penta-
gon is severely hampering press
coverage in Viet Nam.
The problem poses a severe
challenge to the nation's press,
which has always guarded its free-
dom with a firm hand. Although
many editors acknowledge that
they must take into account na-
tional security when they decide
whether or not to print certain
stories, they are nearly unani-
mously opposed to censorship from
official sources (except during
times of officially-declared war).
In Washington, Arthur Sylves-
ter, assistant secretary of defense
for public affairs, has acknowl-
edged "some changes" in an-
nouncements of air strikes against
North Viet Nam but said the de-
partment's policy was one of
"complete candor with newsmen."
IT IS NOT DIFFICULT to imag-
ine the sarcastic glee with which
many reporters and editors have
accepted this statement, for Syl-
vester's remarks constitute the
worst kind of official hypocrisy.
In December, 1962, it was Sylves-
ter who, in a speech before the
national journalistic society Sigma
Delta Chi, defended the Penta-
gon's policy of managed news dur-
ing the Cuban missile crisis.
"It's inherent in a government's
right, if necessary, to lie to save
itself when it is going up into a
nuclear war. This seems to me to
be basic," he said.
Although the Cuban missile
crisis did pose a danger of pos-
sible escalation into nuclear war,
it will come as a surprise to most
newsmen that the present situa-
tion in Viet Nam has the same
ominous characteristics. For there
is no direct confrontation between
the U.S. and the Soviet Union
(apparently by mutual consent),
and so far the Chinese have not
reacted as harshly as had been
expected in some quarters.
THUS, the contention that news
management is necessary at
this time because of a threat to
U.S. national security posed by
the guerrilla conflict in South Viet
Nam is difficult to take seriously.
Not only is the United States
now violating the 1954 Geneva
agreements drawn up at the time
of the French defeat in Indo-
China, but it is carrying out air
strikes against a nation with which
it is not officially at war.

Perhaps it is for this reason
that the Pentagon is so eager to
clamp down whatever restrictions
it can on U.S. correspondents in
the area. Thus it has been dis-
closed in Saigon that recent
harassment of correspondents, ap-
parently ordered by the Penta-
gon, has been increased.
FIVE NEWSMEN were taken into
custody inside the U.S. Marine
compound at Da Nang, a key in-
stallation near the frontier di-
viding North and South Viet Nam.
This is the base from which many
of the recent air strikes into
North Viet Nam and nearby Laos
have been mounted. It is cur-
rently a prime target of the Viet
Cong.
The correspondents were freed
after what a spokesman termed a
misunderstanding. However, new
restrictions have been imposed on
reporters at the base, requiring
them to be met by a military
escort and accompanied by him at
all times. Since the base has only
two men available for escort duty
and at least 30 correspondents
covering Da Nang, the order makes
meaningful coverage almost im-
possible.
The new restrictions seem to be
designed to protect poor, mis-
guided newsmen from seeing the
truth, or whatever the Pentagon
wishes to keep secret at the pres-
ent time.
It is interesting to recall the
anguished cries which emanated
from the privileged sanctuaries of
the State Department and the
Pentagon several years ago when
New York Times correspondent
David Halberstam and others were
filing pessimistic reports from
South Viet Nam. It seems these
newsmen were reporting the war
was going poorly for the South
Viet Nam government.
At the same time, daily State
Department propaganda handouts
were praising the corrupt Ngo
Dinh Diem's government and re-
porting the war was going well. It
was even stated U.S. troops might
be able to leave South Viet Nam
within two or three years.
THAT WAS 1962. Now, the
American people are paying
the price of misinformation and
government distortion of the news.
Despite the valiant efforts of Hal-
berstam and his colleagues, it
came as a severe shock to most
Americans to learn that more
U.S. troops and fundstwould be
necessary to aid the government
for an indefinite period of time
and that the military and civilian

1

leadership was changing hands in
Saigon about as often as some
Hollywood stars seem to change
spouses.
There have been other recent
examples of harassment of U.S.
correspondents in South Viet Nam.
Six weeks ago, the Pentagon an-
nounced a pool of correspondents
would be permitted to join the
Seventh Fleet to report first hand
the activities of American fliers.
Several days ago, however, the
reporters were permitted aboard
the aircraft carrier Ranger for
only a few hours' visit. They were
carefully watched and guided by
23 carefully briefed "escort of-
ficers." Perhaps the Pentagon
feared the correspondents might
fall into the ocean unless they had
some military nursemaids to take
care of them.
Furthermore, interviews with
fliers must now be arranged on
an individual basis-with the es-
cort officer present. The same
policy is now in effect at the
Pentagon itself, where interviews
with officials must be conducted
in the presence of a public-
relations man.
Newsmen have been barred from
U.S. military clubs and restaurants
at both the Da Nang air base and
in the city of Da Nang. It is com-
forting to note that the Pentagon
may be concerned that the cor-
respondents' morals might be cor-
rupted by the soldiers' profanity.
Finally, pilots flying on the
bombing missions outside South
Viet Nam are not even permitted
to talk to anyone, including news-
men.
ONE CORRESPONDENT told an
American military spokesman
in Viet Nam:
"This is the first war in Ameri-
can history in which newsmen are
being barred from the battle area
-in this case air strikes, air bases
and the fleet-to talk freely to the
men involved."
In New York, one of the most
influential journalists in the na-
tion, Wes Gallagher, general man-
ager of the Associated Press, said
recently:
"Barring correspondents from
free access to air bases and other
military installations and provid-
ing an 'escort' for every correspon-
dent is clearly aimed not at secur-
ity matters but at controlling what
American fighting men might say.
Such controls exceed anything
done in the darkest days of World
War II.
"The spectacle of 23 Navy 'es-
cort' officers' greeting a small
group of correspondents on a brief

carrier visit, of scores of press
relations officers being on U.S.
payrolls but not available when a
correspondent wants to get on
an air base, would be ludicrous if
it were not so serious."
There are 115 accredited U.S.
correspondents in all of South
Viet Nam. Sixty U.S. military and
civilian officers are assigned to
keep tabs on correspondents. At
least as many Vietnamese press
officers are similarly employed.
Thus, there is a ratio of about one
information officer per correspon-
dent.
NEWSMEN have expressed no
objection to safeguards against
the leaking of classified informa-
tion vital to secret U.S. military
operations involving the national
security. But newsmen and their
editors share the common con-
cern that no distinction is being
made between stories involving
security and those involving sub-
jects merely annoying or embar-
rassing to military policy makers.
It is obvious that a severe case
of unauthorized military censor-
ship is plaguing U.S. newsmen in
South Viet Nam, as well as those
covering the Pentagon in Wash-
ington.
Perhaps the Pentagon has some
terrible secret which it cannot
make public. Perhaps there are
some factsbeing withheld which,
if made public, would shock Amer-
ican citizens and heap discredit
upon the military.
In any case, it seems clear that
the growing "military-industrial.
complex" of which President
Eisenhower warned shortly before
he left office has already envel-
oped the nation.
THE IMPLICATIONS which can
be drawn from these disclos-
ures, of censorship are manifold.
Restrictions are similar to those
imposed during the Cuban missile
crisis, although in many ways even
more severe.
This indicates either that the
seriousness of the Southeast Asian
crisis has been played down by
government officials up to and
including President Johnson or
that there is some other as-yet-
undisclosed reason why the Penta-
gon is bent on keeping the truth
about U.S. ~military operations in
Viet Nam from the press and the
public.
Perhaps the Pentagon is reluc-
tant to publicize the facts that
napalm bombs are being used in
the air strikes on North Viet Nam
and that many innocent civilians
have been killed and villages des-

stroyed.
Or maybe the Pentagon is re-
luctant to reveal the tragic. in-
efficiency of the South Vietnam-
ese forces: Yesterday these forces
killed nearly 20 children in one
of their own villages during a re-
taliatory air strike against the
Viet Cong.
BUT UNDOUBTEDLY, the im-
plications are even more far-
reaching. For it is clear the
American press faces one of the
gravest challenges in its history.
In order to fulfill its obligation
to the American people to provide
the information necessary to the
proper functioning of our democ-
racy, the press must not succumb
to toe efforts of the government
to hinder the flow of news. But
more important, the government
is making a mockery of the con-
cepts of freedom and democracy if
it even attempts to hinder this
flow.
Wide publicity must be given to
the difficulties faced by U.S
newsmen in South Viet Nam. Per-
haps there will then be an out-
cry from the nation's well-inform-
ed minority for a cessation of the
illegal censorship which the Pen-
tagon is trying to force upon the
press. Editors and publishers have
the responsibility to focus atten-
tion on the issue.
Indeed, this issue provided one
of the strongest foci for the one-
day cancellation of classes plan-
ned by a group of University fac-
ulty members.
MOSTIMPORTANT, it must
not be assumed the Pentagon
has the right to censor news or to
impose difficulties upon the gath-
ering of important news ostensibly
for reasons of national security.
The risk is all too great that the
Pentagon may be attempting to
hide grievous errors, failings which
might lose for it the respect of
American citizens.
The confusion created by the
lack of clarity about U.S. foreign
policy goals, both short-range and
long-term, must be relieved. If it
is not, a dangerous precedent is
being set up which could even
further hamper the press in its
fight to obtain information vital
to the American people.
It seems evident a situation is
developing in Southeast Asia
which may one day burst forth
with dramatic suddenness and
lack of forewarningupon a com-
placent, unsuspecting, meekly-
acquiescent nation.
-CLARENCE FANTO

'4

I

aI

'...

1'


FEAR, STEREOTYPING, DOUBTS:
Reflections of U' Students on Alabama

i

EDITOR'S NOTE: Approximately
55 University students went to Ala-
bama last weekend to answera call
from the Student Non-violent Co-
ordinating Committee. SNCC asked
for a massive influx of northern
students to protest the denial of
Negroes' voting rights in Montgom-
ery. At least 18 students are still
in the South. The following is an
account of the trip and demonstra-
tions written by three students
who returned earlier this week.
ON OUR WAY down South, a
southern white gave his im-
pressions when he found out we
were going to Selma: "Those
damn niggers. I don't know what's
gotten into them. They seem to
want everything. You give them
a little bit, and they want more.
If you gave them the whole state
of Alabama, within a year it'd be
just like over in Africa in those
states. They'd be sitting in the
streets and you'd have to feed 'em
all."
After 15 hours of continous
driving, we were greeted at the
Alabama state line by a vivid sign
proclaiming, "Welcome to the His-
toric State of Alabama, Heart of

Dixie." Below this slogan were
two confederate flags and gigan-
tic letters: "GEORGE C. WAL-
LACE, Governor."
Although we were in three sep-
erate cars, the sentiment seemed
to be common: an aura of fear,
danger and intrigue. In fact, many
of us had grown quite paranoid
by the time we reached Montgom-
ery, "The Heart of the Heart of
Dixie." Two of the cars were im-
mediately surrounded by eight
police cars and kindly escorted out
of town, only to return later.
FOUR OF THE CARS, after
wandering about the side
streets of Montgomery trying to
find the demonstration, screeched
around the corner two blocks from
the demonstration and parked.
People began collecting in the
street, no one in charge and no
one quite knowing what to do now.
But we were there!
It was about three p.m. and
there were about 150 demonstra-
tors sitting in the street and 200
people standing around. The fa-

miliar line of city police blocked
the intersection and any march-
ing that had been contemplated.
No one knew for sure what we
were doing now; this was the
period of orientation and creation
of cohesion.
Everyone signed a list which
was to be used by SNCC in ar-
ranging bail in case we were ar-
rested. In addition, we were told
to write telephone numbers on
our arms so we could call from jail
for bail money. All valuables and
personal belongings were placed
in paper bags to be kept in a local
cafe.
THE DEMONSTRATION went
rather peacefully, in fact so
peacefully that many of the stu-
dents were disappointed. The state
troopers, policemen, fireman,
sheriffs and deputized Klansmen
surrounded us. They made con-
temptuous and obscene comments.
The total lack of commnunica-
tion between the two groups was
evidenced by the stereotype each
had of the other. The troopers

were seen by us and by the Ne-
groes as filthy and mentally de-
ranged. Many called us "paid
Communist agitators from the
North," "pigger lovers," "homo-
sexuals" or "prostitutes."
The biggest question in our
minds was what exactly is the role
and purpose of the white northern
student participation in southern
demonstrations? It seems the
largest benefit our presence af-
forded was our skin color: south-
ern Negroes welcomed us into
their community, for these people
had no contact with whites aside
from submission to police and
other authorities. Our presence
transformed the Negro ghetto.into
a working biracial community with
a common cause.
IT SEEMS presumptuous that
many northern white students
feel they have accurate compre-
hension of the southern situation.
As northern middle class college
students we can't really understand
the culture of the South, and any
action on our part in the South

should be guided by those who are
in tune with the southern situa-
tion-the southerners themselves.
We should be careful not to first
create problems there and then
try to solve them.
In spite of the ° disorganization
of the demonstration and our
misconceptions about southern
culture, however, we feel we were
successful in accomplishing a
necessary goal by going to the
South: adding our white bodies
to the cause. We bolstered Negro
morale by showing not all people
with white skins are their op-
pressors; some are concerned with
their grievances and are willing
to come to their aid.
We learned 80 demonstrators
were arrested in Montgomery yes-
terday. We don't know how many
are from the University, but there
were 18 from Ann Arbor still in
Alabama. SNCC will need bail
money for any University students
in jail. Call 662-4440.
-THOMAS MOORE, GRAD
-RACHEL COLLISTER, '67
-DONNA MEYER, '68

f

Apartments and 'Parentisn'

THE OFFICE of Student Affairs granted
junior apartment permission to "af-
ford individual responsibility and educa-
tional enrichment." But one condition
attached, to this permission has unfav-
orable undertones of in loco parentis: the
clause which says sexual promiscuity,
public drunkeness and property destruc-
tion will subject women to revocation
of apartment privileges.
But with the "parents" and their "chil-
dren" living separate lives, unknown to
each other, what common standard is
there for understanding and judging
each individual's moral attitudes and be-
havior?
Acting Editorial Staff
ROBERT JOHNSTON, Editor
LAURENCE KIRSHBAUM JEFFREY GOODMAN
Managing Editor, Editorial Director
JUDTH WARREN .... . ............Personnel Director
THOMAS WEINBERG .................Sports Editor
LAUREN BAHR..........Associate Managing Editor
SCOTT BLECH ............ Assistant Managing Editor
ROBERT HIPPLER.......Associate Editorial Director
GAIL BLUMBERG . ................Magazine Editor
LLOYD GRAFF.............. Associate Sports Editor
JAMES KESON .................. Chief Photographer
NIGHT EDITORS: William Benoit, David Block,
John Bryant, Michael Juliar, Leonard Pratt.
SPORTS NIGHT EDITORS: Robert Carney, James
LaSovage, Gilbert Samberg, James Tindall, Charles
Vetzner, Bud Wilkinson.
ASSISTANT NIGHT EDITORS: Bruce Bigelow, Sue
Collins, Michael Dean, John Meredith, Peter Sara-
sohn, Barbara Seyfried, Bruce Wasserstein.

Vice-President for Student Affairs
Richard L. Cutler names the Judaeo-
Christian ethic "under which we live"
as this accepted standard in our cul-
ture. He adds that the University now
judges student actions from this in loco
societatis viewpoint -- as society would
judge these actions.
NEVERTHELESS, the group of people
who will say whether women are so-
cially capable of apartment living cannot
help but be forced to adopt a parental
outlook, Cutler proves this by saying that
when students accept freedom, they take
risks. Thus, in cases where "more than
usual" experimentation occurs in test-
ing one ethic against another, "we must
be paternalistic" so students will not de-
stroy themselves.
Speaking as a parent might, Cutler
adds that in ruling what is moral or im-
moral, "the decision cannot be arbitrary,
because there is room for judgment by
the enforcing agency." But the people in
the OSA will all have slightly different
moral codes because of their various up-
bringings and experinces. Also, because
they are no less individuals than junior
women are individuals and because they
are in a position to see only surface sit-
uations, what one basis can those in the
OSA have to decide properly if a student
is in the process of "destroying" herself?
Thus whether it wants to or not. the





LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Student Group Calls Faculty Reversal Unfortunate'

4

To the Editor:
THE FOLLOWING petition is
now being circulated by per-
sons associated with the Student
Committee to Aid the Faculty
(SCAF) and various other organi-
zations:
"We feel that the action of the
faculty group protesting United
States policy in Viet Nam in call-
ing off its moratorium on teach-
ing was both unfortunate and
understandable. We feel that, tak-
ing into account the pressures
which had been brought to bear
on them by their colleagues and
by members of the community at
large, these faculty members were
wise in choosing the course of ac-
tion they did.
"However, we feel that broader
issues-of academic freedom and
university autonomy-raised by
the moratorium cannot be neglect-
ed. We strongly condemn the ac-
tions of the administration of this

the operation of its Flint branch-
has shown itself to be both shal-
low and hypocritical.
Its failure to support the right
of its faculty to protest, if not to
support the form which this ac-
tivity took, is antidemocratic and
opposed to the best traditions of
the academic community.
"Thus, we call upon the Regents
of the University to publicly state
that they support-and will con-
tinue to support-the right of its
faculty to express-as a group-
their sentiments on any topic-no
matter how controversial-without
fear of recrimination, public or
private!
-Stephen L. Berkowitz, '65
Snokesman, SCAF
-Peter A. DiLorenzi, Jr.
War's Realities'
To the Editor:

Communism includes as part of
its doctrine a pledge to spread
itself throughout the world by
force if necessary. If this country
waits until the Red countries of
the world are knocking at our
front door, no amount of military
might we may possess will be
great enough to defend us. We
have no choice but to oppose the
military force of Communism
wherever possible.
No one would pass up the chance
to live under a system of peaceful
coexistence with the Communists
if that were possible. The fact
remains that as long as the free
world is challenged with military
power, it is not possible!
The educated intellectuals who
seek to enlighten mankind with
their demonstrations and protests
over the cruelty of U.S. bombings
in Viet Nam had better re-examine
their past educational curriculum.
Somewhere they flunked the only
real humanities course they took

Tyranny in Asia?
To the Editor:
IN HIS EDITORIAL, "Mission-
aries and Tyrants," Jeffrey
Goodman declared that we have
no right to impose our Western
culture on the Vietnamese because
"they don't want us there." Im-
plicit in this statement is the
idea that backward, uneducated
peasants know what is best for
them.
If this were the case, the Viet-
namese would not be choosing
Communism as a way of life. Yet
this is exactly their choice; for if ,
we were to leave the Vietnamese
alone as they demand, Viet Nam
would soon be engulfed in a Com-
munistic regime. Since the Viet-
namese appear to prefer this
course of Communistic oppression,
we need only look at the misery
in Cuba, Hungary or East Berlin'
to conclude that the Vietnamese

in forcing people to think as we
do if our "brainwashing" can ac-
complish favorable results. And
surely it is desireable to prevent
the emergence of another Com-
munistic regime.
It is natural that the Viet-
namese resent U.S. aggression
now. Vietnam can be compared to
the belligerent teenager who re-
sents the coercive institutions
which forcehim to act against his
will. As the teenager grows up,
his resentment often turns to
gratitude-he is grateful that his
parents made him take music
lessons, that a university made
him take foreign languages, and
so on.
We can hope that the Vietnam-
ese will someday be grateful for
the service we are doing them now.
I HAVE MADE these few re-
marks basically in a philosophical
Vein-tha, oa nordnrio n+I