4 - The Michigan Daily - Monday, July 10, 2000 Edited and managed by GEOFF GAGNON PETER CUNNIFFE students at the Editor in Chief JOsH WICKERHANM University of Michigan Editorial Page Editors S Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion o% the 420 Maynard Street nuitr ofhe Dail s editorial boardAll other articles, letersand Ann Arbor, MI 48109 artoon C1i in/o ne /i ariireijeet the opinion //ifhe Michigan Dail . This fall's presidential debates promise to be exciting and perhaps unusually influ- ential with the likelihood of a close presi- dential race this year. Unfortunately, and as usual, only the Democratic and Republican candidates are likely to be allowed into the debates, even as some third party candidates look increasingly likely to run serious cam- paigns and have a major influence on the outcome of the election. Green party candidate Ralph Nader and likely Refonr party candidate Pat Buchanan are presenting points of view espoused by neither major party candidate and their showings in the polls - while not anywhere near as large as Bush or Gore's - represent substantial numbers of people. That their ideas have been appealing enough to gain a significant following even without the money and press attention of major candi- dates demonstrates that these are serious candidates who can contribute to debates about the direction of this country and who deserve to debate the major party candidates. It has become accepted by my most peo- ple, most media outlets and nearly every Open the debates Third party candidates should have a voice politician that in all political decisions Americans have only two choices. Ideas and candidates outside of the Democratic and Republican parties, as practical, beneficial and widely supported as they may be, are never taken seriously by anyone in office or the mainstream media. They are pushed aside as if nothing suggested outside the major par- ties is even worthy of consideration. Even as more people are choosing to affiliate themselves with neither of the two major parties, the Republicans and Democrats have continued to act as if poli- tics only exists for the two sides of the same coin they represent. And most people have come to just accept the two-party stranglehold on their government. This situation has allowed the two major parties to lay claim to nearly all corporate, union and special interest support and money, which they use to buy advertis- ing and further reinforce their images as the only two choices in politics. Democracy is not about being presented with the same choice year after year. The people of this country deserve the opportu- nity to be exposed to new ideas, third parties, different candidates and real choices. The refusal of most journalistic outlets to devote much attention even to serious third party candidates, other than occassionally opining about trouble they might cause for the major party candidates, and their inability to buy attention through the commercials that major party candidates can buy, mean that the most realistic chance for these candi- dates' ideas to be heard is in the presidential debates. However, the debates are organized by a debate commission completely made up of Democrats and Republicans who are intent on keeping third parties out of the picture. Realistically, it would take support of t major parties' presidential candidates to IM anyone else into the debates, as was done in 1992. They should recognize the stagnation that has gripped political participation in this country and realize that the number of peo- ple voting will only continue to fall. If real alternatives to the political scene's status quo remain hidden from public view, Americans will continue to become less and less inter- ested in politics. Civic life will become steadily less meaningful. If the two major candidates and th parties are interested in the well-being 31 this nation's political system and the health of its democracy, it is about time they real- ized our political system needs to be opened up to those they have been so assiduously forcing out for so many years. Only real choices and new points of view will get the public interested in the direc- tion of this country again. w Cookie monsters Online privacy needs legislation The White House's Office of National top leaders of the ONDCP had no idea per- Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) came sonal data was being profiled on their sites under fire recently for tracking users on fed- until the press broke the story warrants con- erally funded anti-drug websites. Armed cern. with a $12 million advertising budget, the The ONDCP is given unnecessary free ONDCP bought ad space on major search reign and uses too many tax dollars in its pro- engines and directed drug-related searches hibitory drug messages. Whether allegations to federal sites that collected personal data of misuse of personal data in both private or from users with Internet cookies via governmental instances are substantiated, DoubleClick, an online advertising and mar- new legislative attention is required to protect keting giant. Cookies are the small text files consumers from watchful eyes of both gov- stored on personal computers which track ernmental and private power on the Internet. Internet traffic via banner ads or websites. Earlier this year, Michigan Attorney This practice has enraged many online pri- General Jennifer Granholm accused vacy experts and was rightfully discontinued DoubleClick of violating Michigan's by the ONDCP after the story broke. Consumer Protection Act. Granholm said in While the ONDCP says they were only a statement, "Forget Big Brother. Truly, Big collecting raw statistical data and that no Browser appears to have arrived in the form users were tracked by the planted cookies, of an Internet corporate giant. Companies any amount of personal information collect- like DoubleClick take advantage of the tech- ed by the government without full consent nology to rob people of their privacy." -- much less user knowledge - is a viola- DoubleClick has also recently begun tion of federal policy and a breach of priva- combining their over 90 million personal cy. Federal policy states that the White Internet user profiles with hard data, such as House and agency web sites must have names and addresses. Their practices differ clearly posted privacy policies. Although the little from other online companies like ONDCP has since abandoned cookie use, Yahoo!, AOL or Microsoft in their zeal to online privacy remains a hotly contested collect as much user data as possible. issue with implications beyond allegations Through private efforts, the Internet has of governmental misconduct. become a maze of interconnected data col- The personal data collected by private lecting mechanisms showing all the signs of powers remains a formidable threat to priva- significant intensification. The privacy of cy. The ONDCP has maintained close ties to online users is at stake, especially with the private interests before. Earlier this year, wave of fizzled e-commerce burnouts sell- drug czar Barry McCaffrey, the top official ing data to larger corporations. Data that was at the ONDCP, came under fire for his clan- once used by independent companies is now destine program of selling back advertising being amassed by Internet conglomerates at space to television networks who agreed to a frenzied pace. New privacy legislation integrate anti-drug messages into prime time must be enacted before consumers are put at prograimning. These covert propaganda pro- further risk. New measures must also be grams lend little credibility to ONDCP or its taken to reign in the Office of National Drug message. On the cookie matter, the fact that Control Policy. Beautiful buildings Construction alternatives would benefit 'U' When news of the possible demolition of the Frieze building was released earlier this year, few people complained. The decrepit building that many students loathed having classes in is unlikely to be missed by most if it is indeed torn down. The need for the University to have the best facilities possible makes this step wholly welcome. The only probable downside to the loss of the Frieze building would be the distinc- tive structure's likely replacement with one of the Randall Lab-type facilities that have proliferated throughout campus. Much of the new construction and renovations at the University for the past few years have resulted in more "modern" appearing facil- ities that hold little of the character of older campus buildings and largely ignore the aesthetic qualities and distinctiveness that most Universities strive for. Plans for new projects, such as the Life Sciences Institute and the renovations of Haven Hall, show that the University will unfortunately be sticking with this building strategy, which could eventually leave much of central campus looking like a low-rent office park -- similar to North Campus. It is understandable that the primary concern of the University's planners is the quality of education and a focus on pro- grams and faculty over buildings. But it is also saddening to see many of our most beautiful structures being crowded out, overshadowed and sometimes replaced by the new cookie-cutter buildings. The University is in better financial shape than it has ever been, but all of its most notable and attractive facilities were constructed decades ago. The University should consider con- structing buildings with distinctive appeal to students. The Law Quad, for example, leaves an impression on students, visitors and alumni alike. Another approach the University should consider when drawing plans for new c struction is a focus on environmenta friendly building materials and construc- tion techniques. Passive solar or day-light- ed buildings usually cost less to build than normal buildings and significantly cut down on energy costs. These construction techniques cut down on the cost of heating and cooling by providing adequate ventila- tion through ingenious design techniques, not costly heating and cooling syste While the University has every reason o examine environmentally conscious designs for ethical reasons, the savings pro- vided by these buildings in heating, cooling and lighting costs alone should warrant a closer look by the Regents and building planners. The University's "Master Plan" should also include such alternatives. The aesthetic appeal of environmentally friendly buildings and other non-office park look-alikes would lend a distincti flair to our campus. While cookie-cu buildings are often easier to design and construct, the University has a responsibili ty to set an environmentally conscious example. New buildings should incorporate earth-friendly alternatives to the bland glass and brick monoliths that now crowd much of Central Campus. Justifying the use of time and resource on more interesting, unique and enviro mentally friendly buildings can be diffk but hopefully the administration an regents believe the University deserves t be set apart from other schools and b something more than a collection of offic buildings.