4 - The Michigan Daily - Monday, May 19, 2003
420 MAYNARD STREET
ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 SRAVYA CHIRUMAMILLA JASON PESICK
letters@michigandaily.com Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor
EDITED AND MANAGED BY
STUDENTS AT THE Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other pieces do not
SINCE 1890 necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily.
merging from the continued stagna- ployment on those who cannot afford individ-
tion of the Detroit Area Regional G et on th e bu s ultasprainby lmnaigburots
Transportation Authority legislation In the face of cross accusations from the
are all the predictable ramifications of not Route closingssooAATA and various communities and busi-
having a unified regional transportation sys- R show need for regional cooperaion nesses throughout Washtenaw County, the
tem in the greater Detroit area. Washtenaw only viable solution can possibly come
County is currently witnessing the negative While it would be simple to say "the That is, until the AATA doubled the rate to through cooperation from all involved par-
side effects of ongoing bickering by local AATA should not cancel these routes," the $4,000 a year. The AATA has demonstrated ties. Instead of hunting down funds from
politicians in the face of a recession. With scenario is a little bit more complicated; it its benevolence and care for the communi- individual cities and paying increased subsi-
funds as scarce as they are, it should come as is not entirely the decision of the AATA. ty by continuing to run the routes for dies whenever the need arises, a more uni-
little surprise that the Ann Arbor The funding for public transportation in almost a whole year without full funding. fied, centralized system could relieve ten-
Transportation Authority is canceling bus Washtenaw County is divided three ways, There is a small private bus system in sions and allow for more consistency. In a
routes to Dexter and Saline. with most of the money coming from local Chelsea that will attempt to transport those word, what is needed is DARTA. There is a
It is, however, an utter shame. The bene- communities. Currently, individual cities who will be stranded in Dexter, but it does federal grant, paid for by local residents'
fits of public transportation are widely and townships must pay money from their not offer a permanent solution. taxes, which could be paying for bus routes to
known. The loss of these routes will do own treasuries for routes in their area. Saline, on the other hand, decided not to Saline and Dexter right now, but instead is
much more than just clog our highways, While this seems a small penance for the pay for public transportation because of low going to Boston because the politicians in
raise our gas prices and further dirty our air. sake of their citizens who make up the rest ridership. Despite efforts to promote the ser- Lansing cannot see the importance of a
There are people whose livelihoods depend of the funding through transportation fares vice, there is still only an average of three pas- viable public transportation system.
on affordable transportation. There are and tax-dollars spent in the form of state sengers per bus, instead of the target number Yes, the AATA should not cancel the
homeless families who must use the bus to and federal grants, local communities have of fifteen; however, passenger fares only routes, but, in the long run, the responsibility
get to the Alpha House shelter in Dexter. begun to withhold the funds. make up 17 percent of the entire funding. lies on the shoulders of the elected represen-
There are even those with developmental Scio Township stopped a few years ago, Even such a small number of AATA patrons tatives. The people of the greater Detroit area
disabilities who rely on public transporta- but the West Washtenaw Business makes the service worthwhile tothe commu- need DARTA, and regional cooperation is the
tion to lead healthy, independent lives. Association continued to pay the subsidy. nity. It is counterproductive to force unem- only viable solution to this problem.
4
4
4
Everything's fit to print
NYT embarrassment should not discredit diversity
Chalk it up!
Restrictions on chalking limit freedom of expression
Jn the biggest blow to the "paper of
record's" credibility in its 152-year histo-
ry, on May 1, Jayson Blair, the 27-year-
old supposed journalism phenom, resigned
from The New York Times after admitting to
committing plagiarism in a number of arti-
cles. Considering his history of falsification,
the implications of his resignation and the
facts concerning his employment at the
Times, there is little doubt of his guilt. One
other thing: he is black.
If that last sentence seems startling, if it
seems out of place and irrelevant - inap-
propriate even - it would be wise to direct
attention toward conservatives who are
turning this incident into an argument
against taking measures to promote diversi-
ty in the workplace. Those with a predispo-
sition to dislike the Gray Lady because they
abhor the paper's liberal editorial positions
and envy its unrivaled prestige in the world
of journalism are quick to mention execu-
tive editor Howell Raines' comments at the
2001 National Association of Black
Journalists convention focusing on the
Times' commitment to achieving diversity.
Raines specifically cited Blair as an out-
standing example of a talented young black
reporter. He said, "This campaign has made
our staff better and, more importantly,
diverse." This statement is now being used
to imply that the Times' folly was the result
of prioritizing diversity over quality.
While allowing Blair's star to rise unim-
peded for so long in the face of numerous
errors certainly is disgraceful, Raines' asser-
tion that having a diverse staff is an asset to
the entire newspaper, is on the mark. Any
newspaper that purports to present unbiased
news including a variety of viewpoints has
the responsibility of attempting to represent
a variety of demographic groups. For a
newspaper such as the Times, which caters
to a diverse nation - and indeed, to the
entire world - it is of particular importance
that as many ethnicities as possible be rep-
resented. This is important not only to
ensure that equal opportunities are granted
to all ethnicities, but also to increase the
credibility of the newspaper in the eyes of
readers. Furthermore, it is these policies of
inclusion that have helped minorities join
the ranks of the elite in this country.
The real problem encountered by the
Times is not its emphasis on diversity.
Instead, the issue at hand is a failure by the
paper's editors. They ignored his factual
errors not once or twice, but repeatedly.
Not even the desire to create a diverse
workplace can excuse this.
The Times' article about the fiasco fea-
tures metropolitan editor Jonathan
Landman claiming that he did all in his
power to make Blair's journalistic inade-
quacies known; however, Landman also
claims that he "wasn't asked so much as
told" when Blair would be promoted.
The most logical explanation for this
mess is that those at the top of the ladder
neglected and ignored lower-ranking edi-
tors. In this environment, it is evident how
a charismatic and seemingly hardworking
employee such as Blair could climb from
being a lowly intern to a staff reporter cov-
ering stories of great import.
In reality, the Blair debacle is not a
matter of race at all, though it is being
marketed as one by opponents of affirma-
tive action. Instead, it is the result of a
tremendous organizational failure.
Affirmative action in the work place is
invaluable and is being unjustly attacked
because of one journalistic con artist's
skin color.
Students at Wesleyan University in
Middletown, Conn. were left feel-
ing betrayed after the university's
president placed a ban on a popular out-
let for art and advertising: chalking.
President Douglas J. Bennet has
declared that the sidewalk scribbles were
not meeting "the civility test" and
ordered students to surrender their
chalk. Nevertheless, students on the
active campus are angrily protesting this
infringement upon free speech rights -
and rightly so.
Recently, chalk has been kicked to the
curb on many campuses around the
nation, including the University of
Kentucky, where students are now
required to get permits before they are
allowed to chalk. The University of
Nebraska has followed a similar course
by organizing special chalking zones.
While more and more campuses are
drawing the line against chalking, the
University should stand vehemently
against such policies.
Chalk-outlawing universities are
merely fearful of students' right of free-
dom of expression, and all too often this
fear leads to limitations placed on
important rights. Officials worry that
chalking will be used to increase hate
messages and dread that streets will
offend pedestrians. They also fear the
lack of accountability, for rarely do stu-
dents sign the sidewalks they chalk.
Limiting basic rights, however, is not
the answer. While today there may only
be an abolition of chalking, tomorrow
could very well bring something differ-
ent. Each limitation on free speech opens
doorways for further limitation. Will
Wesleyn officials ban flyers and posters
next? These communication mediums
have the same ability to offend and the
same lack of accountability.
Furthermore, the alternatives to
chalking are less environment-friendly.
Chalk does not end up in the trash, nor
does it litter the campus. If students cur-
rently think the towering stacks of paper
around the University used by organiza-
tions for advertising are wasteful, they
should take a moment to imagine cam-
pus without chalking.
Chalking is vital to University campus
life. A multitude of organizations turn to
chalk as an easy, inexpensive way to pro-
mote themselves. Already at a loss for
funding, to remove chalk would only
increase the debt of most clubs because
they would have to turn to more expensive
means of advertising, like Xeroxing.
Universities need to learn to trust stu-
dents to use chalk as an outlet for expres-
sion, regardless of a few rough sketches.
Instead, President Bennet has also tried to
form a compromise with students by
pushing for censorship of obscene chalk-
ing. He wants to have the ability to erase
any names of people who might be
offended by seeing their names etched in
sidewalk; however, censoring communal
language still invades the realm of ,free
speech. In addition, over time, it is likely
that officials would become increasingly
stringent in their evaluations of what is
offensive and needs to be erased.
While many university officials across
the country have gone too far in their
restrictions of chalking, students must be
cognizant of the effects that their words
can have. In turn, it would behoove
administrators to understand the impor-
tance of healthy campus debate.