4A -- Monday, September 26, 2011

The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com

4A - MndaySepteber 26.2011The.Mchiga.Daily- micigandil ..o


Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Anonymous writers

STEPHANIE STEINBERG
EDITOR IN CHIEF

MICHELLE DEWITT
and EMILY ORLEY
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

NICK SPAR
MANAGING EDITOR

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
F ROM T HE DA ILY
A fatal penalty
Capital punishment should be abolished
s the world watched the controversy over Troy Davis's exe-
cution in Georgia last week, there was much debate over the
necessity and morality of capital punishment. Davis was con-
victed of murdering an off-duty police officer in 1989, but his guilt was
seriously in question. In a justice system full of imperfections, ques-
tions and doubts, it's difficult to agree with the court's irreversible
decision. The death penalty is not a just way to punish a crime and
should be abolished in the United States.

Anonymity of sources and
writers is generally shunned
in journalism, and this sen-
timent is reflected in the bylaws
of The Michigan Daily. A debate
about this issue arose in light of the
Daily's decision to grant anonymity
to the writer of
a cover story in IMRAN
The StatementS
about fake IDs SYED
(Faking 21: How Public Editor
bouncers catch
fake IDs and
underage students get past the rope,
9/05/2011).
Readers raised concerns about
the need and wisdom of granting
anonymity to the writer in this case.
To broaden my own perspective, I
also solicited the thoughts of three
former Daily editors (who hailed
from three different sections of the
Daily). Finally, I sat down for a dis-
cussion about the story and the deci-
sions that went into it with its writer
and the two editors most respon-
sibleforit: StatementEditorCarolyn
Klarecki and Daily Editor in Chief
Stephanie Steinberg.
(Because the Daily's decision to
grant anonymity is final, this col-
umnrefers to the writer as ageneric
"he." This should not be taken as
an indication of the writer's actual
gender.)
The main concerns raised were
about the credibility a newspaper
loses by not having a name attached
to each story. Was the story so weak
or questionable that the writer can't
stand by it? Shouldn't the Daily
make all writers own up to the shots
they take? Did the Daily facilitate
illegality by protecting the name of
a writer who broke laws? And if so,
was the final product worth all that?
Having read the story closely sev-
eral times, I find it rather harmless
- in two important ways.
First, I don't believe the writer
abused the anonymity granted to
say things he otherwise wouldn't. In
fact, for the most challenging parts
of writing this story - attempting to
dupe bouncers at bars and explain-
ing his misdeeds to perturbed bar
owners and managers - the writer
actually did .1 ealt hmself. The
writer took the significant step of

exposing himself to that hostile
group to Write a story that wasclear-
ly not easy. The journalism here,
despite its other flaws, was anything
butlazy.
Second, however, I remainuncon-
vinced that the story accomplished
anything significant. In my discus-
sion with the writer and editors
responsible, they could not explain
the story's purpose or even assess
the end product on anything other
than a primary, facial level. I was
told that not everything in a college
newspaper, and certainly not every-
thing in a magazine like The State-
ment, should be an advocacy piece
that pushes an agenda.
While I agree with that senti-
ment, I must stress my disagreement
with the decision to take the sub-
stantial step of granting anonymity
to a writer for a story that apparently
wasn't even intentioned to make a
solid point.
It's undeniable that an anony-
mous story is a strain on the Daily's
credibility: It's natural for people
to be more suspicious of something
said anonymously as compared to
something with a name attached to
it. Without a writer standing by the
words that are written, the entire
weight of any flaws the story may
have falls on the Daily itself. This is
a weight the Daily willingly bears
in the case of unsigned editorials,
which are the opinion of the paper
as a whole.
But the Daily, like any institu-
tion, has only a limited supply of
credibility capital, and it should be
expended judiciously. There will be
rare occasions when a costly dip into
that reserve will be necessary. But
it's crucial to separate situations of
such necessity from the less press-
ing situations where anonymity is a
mere tool of convenience. I believe
the Statement story at issue falls into
the latter category.
When asked if the story could
have been written with a byline,
the writer and editors responsible
concluded that it could not. Cit-
ing the law-breaking the writer
engaged in, the editors stated that
including a -name-would, doom
the writer isnsmaxiofair'wyse.
Every time a prospective;employer

searched the name on the Internet,
this story would come up - and it
would be hard to explain the mer-
its of the story to an interviewer,
especially someone outside the
field of journalism.
While I sympathize with that
dilemma, I conclude that it is not a
mandatory one. The focus should be
on how to write the story in the first
place, rather than on whether to risk
a byline on the story as written.
The story could have been writ-
ten through observation and inter-
action, using all ethnographic tools
needed - short of the writer's own
participation in illegal activity - to
create authenticity. And if that were
done, there would be no need for
anonymity. While there would be
some loss of experiential proxim-
ity in this alternative approach, I
found nothing that the first-person
perspective added to this story that
would be so worth retaining.
Though the story was a diligent
exercise in journalistic legwork,
it avoided all engagement with
any of the several abstract debates
it stumbled upon. Why do bars
return fake IDs to students? Why
do bars known to be more lenient
to underage drinkers continue
to escape reprimand? And most
importantly, what do underage
drinking laws really mean in a col-
lege town where all sides concede
and generally accept that the laws
are constantly broken?
It's perfectly fine to say, as the
writer and editors did to me, that
thepurposeofsomestorieswillsim-
ply be to start a conversation - as
opposed to exposing wrongdoing or
advocating an agenda. But the ques-
tion then becomes whether such
stories that make no bold argument
warrant the protection of anonym-
ity. Given the costs such protection
involves for this paper as an institu-
tion, I believe that they do not.
-The public editor is an independent
critic of the Daily, and neither the editorial
board nor the editor in chief exprcise
control over the contentsof his columns.
The opinions expressed do not necessarily
constitute the opinion of4he Daily.
f lhwmsn $yed can'be eiaehed'at
publiceditor@michigadailg.com

The certainty of a conviction in the U.S.
legal system can almost never be guaranteed.
In any trial, there's always potential for doubt
regarding an individual's guil-,In Davis's
trial, witnesses recanted their statements,
jurors expressed doubts, a weapon was never
found and DNA evidence was not available,
but a man was still sentenced to death. The
responsibilities of higher courts and appellate
review are to verifyasentencingt.yond area-
sonable doubt and to assess the legitimacy of
a trial. However, these processes don't ensure
the correct sentencing, which is why the final-
ity of capital punishment is so troubling.
The Davis trial lacked reliable physical
evidence - mainly a murder weapon. The
case relied predominantly on eyewitness tes-
timony, which was revealed to be question-
able at best after the trial. Seven of the nine
non-police witnesses recanted their testi-
mony, and many of the witnesses said police
coerced them to implicate Davis. Confident
eyewitness testimony is becoming less trust-
worthy in legal proceedings, and this type of
evidence should be considered insufficient
'hen a court is deciding whether or not to
put a person to death. In thetLS., 75 percent
of :onvictions in cases that were overturned
with DNA evidence had previously relied on
eyewitness testimony as the main source of
evidence.
Apart from the unreliability of eyewitness-
es, the U.S. legal system has its fair share of
problems. Poorer criminals often receive infe-
rior legal counsel and harsher penalties than
wealthier ones. Additionally, issues of race
often affect decisions in the courtroom. Mil-
tiple studies have shown that black defendants
receive harsher punishment than whites, and

when a case involves the murder of a minor-
ity, the defendants tend to receive lighter
sentences. According to the Death Penalty
Information Center, 76 percent of death row
inmates murdered white victims, and only 14
percent murdered black victims, even though
whites account for 50 percent of murder vic-
tims. Clearly, the prejudices and injustices of
society translate into the legal system.
It is also a misconception that it's more
expensive to incarcerate a person for life than
to execute him or her. This is factually incor-
rect. The California legal system would save
more than $100 million per year if it abolished
the death penalty. Currently, California tax-
payers pay about $114 million per year toward
inmates. On the contrary, taxpayers spend
upwards of $250 million for every execu-
tion the state carries out, mainly because of
the additional time and resources required.
A sentence of life in prison still undergoes
an extensive trial and appeals process, but is
drastically less costly.
The Davis case shows how even a bro-
ken system can put a man to death. But the
death penalty should be abolished, even in
the most certain of cases.It's avestigialrem-
nant of a system born not from justice, but
from revenge. More and more countries are
abolishing the death penalty because of inher-
ent flaws of criminal justice systems and its
inhumane nature. One-hundred thirty-nine
countries no longer have a death penalty, and
in 2010 the U.S. ranked fifth in number of
criminals executed - behind China, North
Korea, Iran and Yemen. The globe is moving
in a more humanitarian direction, and the
United States should do the same. The sooner
this happens, the better.

a
U

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Aida Ali, Michelle DeWitt, Ashley Griesshammer, Patrick Maillet,
Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Emily Orley,
Teddy Papes, Timothy Rabb, Seth Soderborg, Andrew Weiner
L E ETTRS TO THE ED ITOR SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@MICHIGANDAILY.COM

JEFF ZUSCHLAG E-MAIL JEFF AT JEFFDZ@UMICH.EDU
We are an advanced nation
r and h aluue ofuth erdividua
-
E I dunno, I'm not sure
that's the vibe I'mn
getting-.-.
SCOT T CH RISTOPH ER AND NA JIA YA RKH A |N
P itch your pas slon

The future won't involve a
return to subsistence living
TO THE DAILY:
Daily writer and apparent doomsayer Tim
Rabb approvingly cites economist Thomas
Malthus and worries whether overpopula-
tion and resource depletion will produce a
future where we "supplant our cars with
horses and our supermarkets with backyard
farms" (Too little, too late?, 9/14/2011).
Chill out, man. The grim predictions of
Malthus and his followers have been proved
wrongtime and time again.
Malthus died in 1834. In the subsequent
150 years, the population continued to grow,
but thanks to innovations in agriculture,
fewer people starved. Still, Malthusians in
the 1970s predicted worldwide famine and

resource depletion. Paul Ehrlich, a Stanford
professor and overpopulation expert, said
that by the year 2000 the United Kingdom
would consist of "a small group of impover-
ished islands, inhabited by some 70 million
hungry people." Unsurprisingly, it didn't
happen.
In nearly all corners of the world, people
are wealthier and healthier today than they
were in 1970 or 1834 - indeed, than ever
before in human history. So no matter what
happens to energy prices in the coming
decades, I'm willing to bet that the future
will not involve some worldwide return to
subsistence living. Let's not waste valuable
space on The Michigan Daily opinion page
pretending otherwise.
Robby Soave
University alum and former Editorial Page
Editor of the Daily.


Historic districts are useful
for managing change

its marquee becausf
owners at one point
Of course the An
opment Authority
played a major rol

TO THE DAILY: district status (thi
I started to read the Sept. 20 Daily article renovations and
Walking the Line: How Ann Arbor balances tax credits) these 1
old with new in the hopes that you had finally charm they have t
realized how important historic preservation districts, both CVS
and historic districts are to the character of stores and the buil
Ann Arbor. The cover photo of 19th century tinue to evolve. Th
Main Street certainly led me to this conclu- being in a district
sion. However, I was very wrong. Nowhere do not frozen in ambe
you mention the Historic Districts that cover Our business distri
both Main Street and State Street and parts of ity - proof that his
Liberty and William. Without them, buildings a useful tool for m,
would have been demolished and altered-inap- increasing complex
propriately. One example is how the city saved
the Michigan Theater from becoming a mall Susan Wineberg
in the 1980s. Also, the State Theatre still has University alum

e of its historic status - the
t wanted to remove it.
n Arbor Downtown Devel-
and the landlords have
e, but without the force of
rough which many of the
upgrades have received
blocks would not have the
oday. And despite being in
and 7-Eleven have opened
dings and businesses con-
ere is the false belief that
prevents change. We are
r - we're not frozen at all.
cts are buzzing with activ-
toric districts have proven
anaging change in an ever
reality.

This year's 1000 Pitches competition has now begun.
Some of you may recognize it or the name may at least
ring a bell. But for those of you who don't know, 1000
Pitches is an annual entrepreneurial business pitch
competition held by MPowered Entrepreneurship. To
enter, students submit 30-second to three-minute long
videos discussing their business ideas in any of the
nine categories: Consumer Products, Environment,
Hardware & Tech, Health, Local Business, Mobile
App, MProvements (Improvements to the University
of Michigan), Social Entrepreneurship and Web &
Software. There are 10 finalists per category, and ifa
student wins a category he or she is awarded $1,000.
In addition to the monetary reward, winners will have
the opportunity to tour both the Google offices and the
Quicken Loans offices. Some skeptics may wonder what
the catch is. Well, there really isn't one. 1000 Pitches is
put on with the intent of driving the spirit of creativity
and innovation on our campus.
1000 Pitches began four years ago with a mission to
spread entrepreneurship on campus. In the competi-
tion's first year, MPowered members went onto campus
armed with a few laptops to record pitches and lots of
pizza to give out. During that year, MPowered's 1000
Pitches team reached its goal by receiving over 1,000
pitches. The next year, 1000 Pitches received more than
2,000 pitches and was named Project of the Year by the
Office of Student Affairs and Leadership in 2010. Last
year, 1000 Pitches challenged students to "Think Big"
and students accepted that challenge by submitting over
3,000 pitches. That made 1000 Pitches the largest stu-
dent run business pitch competition in the world.
This year, 1000 Pitches is back with a new tagline,
"My Passion. My Pitch." We want students to reach
into what they love and are passionate about, think
of ways to change and innovate it and turn that into a
pitch. We want students to be inspired, and we feel the
best way to do that is to have them turn their passions
into their pitches.

In order to best connect to students' passions, 1000
Pitches is working with student organizations around
campus to plan events and activities to involve and
impact students based onwhat theylove. Events such as
a Social Entrepreneurship Week for students interested
in service and giving back are in the works.
In addition to inspiring students, 1000 Pitches has
had winners take their ideas to the next level. The win-
ner of the 2009 Environment category has launched his
own company, June Energy, which creates affordable,
portable solar energy systems that act as sources of light
at night and also work to provide electricity. The winner
of the 2010 Health category is working on his company
SanoBio, developing a product that accelerates wound
closure times.
Of course, not all ideas have to be like those. Both
winners discussed above were passionate about their
ideas and took them forward for that reason. We want
students throughout the University to hear about 1000
Pitches and submit their ideas to us.
This year, every Tuesday for the duration of the com-
petition - the last day to submit pitches is November 11
-1000 Pitches willbe doing something fun on the Diag.
This Tuesday, we are implementing Operation: Let It
Shine. Be sure to keep your eyes open for us.
And along with keeping your eyes open, start think-
ing about your ideas. Pitch submissions have opened,
and we have a Pitch of the Week prize. The earlier
you pitch, the better chance you have of winning the
prize. Remember you can pitch up to three times, and
we recommend it because it increases your chances of
winning. To pitch online, please visit us at 1000pitches.
com. We are looking forward to seeing all of the creative
ideas that the University's leaders and the best come up
with this year, so be sure to let them be heard.
Scott Christopher is a Business sophomore.
Najia Yarkha isan Engineering sophomore.
They are the 1000 pitches project directors.

a

6

a