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.