Wednesday, December 7, 1966
THE DAILY TAR HEEL
i !
i
1 1
i i
i K
I pi
I
f MB
025 r Opinion . . .
No Easy Way To Decide
hat's Fit For Printing
John Greenbacker
w
"All the news that's fit to
print" is a motto the New York
Times has made famous the
world over. With our six - page
limitation on size The Daily Tar
Heel has been accused of operat
ing on a policy of "All the news
that fits, we print"; however, we
do try to adhere to the noble
standards outlined by the Times.
Naturally we are not able to
print everything that comes our
- way and might be called news.
Likewise, we get other material
' ranging from letters to lost and
found articles which does not
bear publication. We might give
you an example of two such items
we received this week:
First there was a typewritten
lost and found notice: "Found
One tube of Revlon lipstick, in the
vicinity of Old East, on Saturday,
Dec. 3. Any coed (be she typical
or not) claiming said lipstick, be
fore receiving lost merchandise,
will be required to identify it in one
of the two socially accepted meth
ods. Either (1) allow finder to con
duct lipstick taste test, or (2) have
claimee whisper (ever so softly) 10
times into the finder's ear the name
or number of the lipstick shade.
"Persons interested in an ap
pointment time should call 'Sev
enth Heaven', 710 Morrison, 929
5014, and speak with David Yelton.
For the more daring, however, just
stop by Room 710 anytime after 8
p.m. any day but never, never
on Sunday."
More recently we received a
letter of the ransom note variety.
, Printed words and letters of dif
ferent sizes and styles were affix
ed by cellophane tape to a sheet
of standard theme paper. The mes
sage read: ;
-Confidential-Tp the; Editor: ;
You'lf be sorry " if you priSf
Tar Heel again. It's time to call a
halt to your hog feed. We hate you.
Signed, The Hoods, Del Rio,
U.S.A."
Interestingly, the reverse side
"of the theme paper had check
marks in the "good" column be
side "thought," "general effect," .
: "organization," "paragraphing,"
"diction," "grammar," 'sentence
structure," "punctuation," "spell
ing," and "mechanics."
We think .it obvious why such
items as the two described here
are not printed. However, it is
also our policy to screen adver
tising for reasons which are less
obvious. One reader questioned our
policy in a letter we received yes
terday: Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
As I understand it, the DTH has
refused to print certain advertise
ments for Troy's Radio and Stereo
Co. I believe the decision not to
print these ads because they were
in "poor taste' was made by the
Business Manager andor a group
in the advertising department.
This letter is simply an inquiry as
to (1) who makes the decision that
ah ad is in poor taste or obscene
. and (2) what is the criteria for
I Signs 0! The Times
; Sure signs that Christmas is al
l most here:
i The lights in the Franklin Street
' decorations downtown are begin
ning to burn out.
'
Prices are beginning to sky
:. rocket.
.
Term papers and book reports
due.
GM has a stand of ribbon and
tinsel on the hand rail of their
stairway so none of the nice old
ladies bringing letters to .the DTH
can support themselves while
, climbing the steps.
Your girlfriend has been drop
ping hints about a certain "little"
item she saw in a magazine and
is just dying to have.
this decision? I am especially in
terested in the definitions of obs
cenity and offensiveness which are
used and the point or conditions
at which a reference to sex is
unprintable.
Robin Dial
The answer to the first ques
tion is simple. Such decisions are
made by either the advertising
manager or the business manager
in most cases. Sometimes the edi
tor is involved in the process.
We would , like to clarify one
point. No advertisement from
Troy's has been withheld from
publication. Almost all of them,
however, had been modified.
(This, of course, is with the excep
tion of the first one concerning the
size of stereo equipment and post
football game entertainment of
dates, which slipped by without
our knowing about it.)
The answer to the second ques
tion is a bit more complicated,
and, in fact, has no standard an
swer. Obscenity, offensiveness and
reference to sex, we feel, must be
considered in relation to the spe
cific use of any word, expression
or picture.
A term, used in an article on
birth control, for example, might
not be at all acceptable as a cap
tion under a picture of a Carolina
coed listening to a radio. As a gen
eral rule we try to avoid printing
anything which would be offensive
to a majority or a sizable mi
nority of our readers.
God knows we've had our trou
ble staying on the right side of that
thin dividing line this year. We
have, no doubt, had something to
offend everybody at some time or
other. You can rest assured that
.anything we censor is not cut be
cause- we personally dislike It. We
defy anyone to show us some
thing that will gross us out. But
we do have to remember our read
ing public:
And, judging from the com
ments we've received as a ' result
of a recent cartoon (despite its
overwhelming popularity with a
large portion of the campus), per
haps we're going to have to try
harder.
To the writer of the letter, if
this doesn't help answer your ques
tion, we invite, you to stop by our
office and look at some of the copy
we have changed. Then decide
whether or .not you would want to
walk across campus and look at
people who knew you were respon
sible for its publication.
74 Years of Editorial Freedom
Fred Thomas, Editor
Tom Clark, Business Manager
Scott Goodfellow, Managing Ed.
John Askew Ad; Mgr.
John Greenbacker : Assoc. Ed.
Bill Amlong News Ed.
Kerry Sipe ..- Feature Ed.
Sandy Treadwell Sports Editor
Bill Hass ....... .. Asst. Sports Ed.
Jock Lauterer Photo Editor
Chuck Benner Night Editor
STAFF WRITERS
Don Campbell Lytt Stamps, Er
nest Robl, Steve Bennett, Steve
Knowlton, Judy Sipe, Carol Won
savage, Diane Warman, Karen
Freeman, Cindy Borden, Julie
Parker, Peter Harris, Drum
mond Bell, Owen Davis, Joey
Leigh, Dennis Sanders.
CARTOONISTS
Bruce Strauch, Jeff MacNelly
The Daily Tar Heel is the official
news publication of the University of
North Carolina and is published by
students daily except Mondays, ex
amination periods and vacations.
Second class postage paid at the
Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C.
Subscription rates: $4.50 per semes
ter; $8 per year. Printed by the
Chapel Hill Publishing Co., Inc., 501
W. Franklin St., Chapel Hill, N. C.
A Free UmiveFsity At Chapel Hill
The Free University of
North Carolina?
An improbable title, isn't it?
More improbable, too, is
the idea that such an organi
zation and the numerous im
plications it has for the uni
versity community could be
come a reality in Chapel Hill.
But sit down, students, pro
fessors, - admin
istrators, towns
men. Sit down,
compose your
selves and read
on.
The improb
able is about to
become actual
ity, and sooner
than you think,
for Student
Government's education re
form groups have finally crys
talized their thinking and for
mulated a plan of action that,
if successful, will significantly
alter the educational processes
of the University.
Since the Reidsvile confer
ence on education, student
leaders have been aware that
there was widespread support
among the faculty for experi
mentation in UNC education.
The real difficulty, as every
one at the conference knew,
would come in translating the
ideas into action.
The dialogue on education
was continued on campus by
means of seminar groups , set
up by Student Government.
These three . groups continued
to talk about education for
about a month and a half, un
til the participating students
began to express the opinion
that they had talked enough.
No one had any really clear
idea of what to do t o bring
about the changes they want
ed. Some foresaw a long bat
tle with the University ad
ministrators that would ulti
mately prove fruitless. Only
the faculty could be counted
on to give support to some of
the ideas.
Two of the education reform
workers, David Kiel and Jon
athan Gibson, consulted with
a number of professors and
the school of education to es
tablish small, student-directed
seminars. Other groups sought
to work for the intsitution of
pass-fail grading on a trial
basis.
All these procedures, how
ever, required and still de
ma n d considerable patience
and student suasion, and
many were not satisfied with
the scope of the results.
Into this vacuum stepped a
man with nerve enough to
Dropose the big idea Jed
Dietz, student legislator and .
an early supporter of the re
form movement, mobilized
one seminar group to estab
lish a free experimental uni
versity on this campus which
would be put into operation
next spring.
The plan was simple: Stu
dents in the group proposed
the names of professors they
knew might be interested in
the program, and went out to
seek their aid. Each professor
was asked the question,
"Name or describe a course
you have always wanted to
teach, but have never had the
opportunity to do so for one
reason or another."
The professors were then
asked if they would be willing
to "non-direct" this course for
a small group of students in a
non - credit seminar. This
means that the professor
would meet with a group of
students whenever they chose
to discuss the subject and
plan for further study..
Under the plan, the profes
sor would not be lecturing tis
the students, but would lend
his presence and occasional
comments to the group's re
marks. The system would tax
the professor's time limits
very little, and the meeting
places would be informal and
relaxed.
They could meet in a pro
fessor's home, in Graham
Memorial, or on the lawn if
they pleased. . '
This system would foster
student motivation to learn,
would bring out student in
dividuality of though and in
dividual direction of learning
activities without the damag
ing influence of regimented
classroom situations. With
faculty - student relationships
placed on a personal level,
the entire value of the intellec
tual confrontation will be in
creased significantly for all
parties involved.
Registration for these sem
inar classes would be simple.
The professor's name and a
brief description of the course
would be posted on a piece of
paper in a public area, say
Graham Memorial or Y-Court.
Students would drop by and
sign up for whatever they are
interested in.
With this plan in mind, stu
dents have heen going about
the campus enlisting faculty
support. The results have
been described as being good
to astounding.
Not one professor has been
critical of the idea; all thought
it would be a healthy thing.
Kiel, who was hot really con
vinced that the program would
work, was persuaded that it
would by one enthusiastic pro
fessor he interviewed for the
program. Those who could
not participate in the pro
gram because of prior com
mittments regretted sincerely
that they wouldn't work with
it.
To date, nearly thirty pro
fessors have listed courses
they would like to "non-direct"
with the experimental
college, more than enough to
initiate the program, if we
use the experimenst at San
Francisco State or New Mex
ico as examples.
The students who are plan
ning this thing are making no
claims that they have all the
answers. They are plagued by
doubts that it will work, that
their suppositions are correct
or that the student body will
support the idea.
They realize they are back
ed up in this enterprise only
by aspects of Rogerian psy
chology, Paul Goodman's con
cept of university education
and a compulsive intuition
that tells them to act, even if
they embark on an uncertain
journey.
However it is viewed, this
free university idea is a fan
tastic one and deserves all
the praise and support it can
get. Indeed, it may be labeled
a success from the very be
ginning, if for any other rea
son than because it is an ac
tive attempt to better the in
tellectual life of the univer
sity. To a- student body long
plagued by grading systems,
sententious and boring profes
sors who talk constantly, mass
lecture classes, insignificant
memorization, test regurgita
tion, educational irrelevance
and depersonalization, this
outlet may be the long-sought
relief.
In this age of student aliena
tion, we could pray for noth
ing greater.
Letters To The Editor
Goefformigt
All
A Curiosity
Editor,. the Daily Tar Heel:
I read John Greenbacker's
Sunday Tarheel editorial on
SDS leader Gary Waller with
a good deal of disappointment.
To me it was an unpleasant
reminder of what can happen
to someone with off - center
ideas in a university with a
rather conformist atmosphere.
It would have been under
standable if Mr. Waller had ,
been presented as a kind of
archaism," an 'amusing 'absur-"
dity from out of the essenti
ally adolescent ideological
struggles of the 1930's, or, oft
a lower level, as simply a
trouble-maker.
Such charges are easily
made and easy enough to re
fute, for there is no hidden
psychological effect behind
the charges; everything is
strictly on a good guys - bad
guys basis. But Greenback
er's article on Waller took
another tact.
Greenbacker, and by impli
cation, the other Tarheel writ
ers, just loved him.
After listening to Waller say,
"I don't owe this damned
country anything," Green
backer's only response is: "He
has a way of smiling at you
when he makes statements of
this sort that is very difficult
to describe in words. Its mali
cious and impish in nature,
and it never appears unless
accompanied by a strange
brightness in his eyes."
Next Greenbacker suspects
that "the ATO from Drake
University" is "putting us all
on." Conceding later that
"when the chips are down
Waller speaks "with force and
authority," we are left with
this interesting comment: "We
all hated to see him go, be
cause it isn't often that our
day is brightened by a cam
pus character of Waller's
magnitude."
The article in reality illus
trates a clever and devastat
ingly effective method of mak
ing a man rot sweetly. Waller
will henceforth be seen by the
Tarheel editors, at least by
Mr. Greenbacker, through a
mist of smiling tenderness,
not as a man whose ideas are
to be taken seriously, but as
a subject for a journalistic
exercise in "human interest,"
as a "campus character,"
nice to have around to add
color to the dull Carolina
atmosphere.
We were not asked to at
tack Mr. Waller as a force
for formidable and important
political and social ideas,
which many of us oppose on
rational grounds. Instead, we
were asked by Mr. Green
backer to admire Waller as a
curiosity.
It is indeed saddening to
wonder if such is not to be
the ultimage fate of all genu
inely v radical differences of
idea or of character in an en
vironment as conformist as
the one we find too often in
this university. If the man
holding these ideas is not at
tacked head-on and in an ad
hominem argument, as was
Mr. James Gardner a few
years ago in a particularly
vicious DTH editorial, then
readers are gently tricked in
to chuckling at him behind
his back.
I dp not mean to suggest
that Mr. Greenbacker's use of
this method of character dis
posal was deliberate. Not at
all. My real concern is that it
probably was not.
George A. Glann
Pitiful Sam
Editor, the Daily Tar Heel:
Before reading Mr. Sam
West's recent letter, I would
have discounted the likelihood
of such a shallow, callous de
fense of Kappa Alpha's petu
lant prank and such a heavy
handed, slashing assault on
the character of various pro
testers against alleged injus
tices perpetrated on this cam
pus. I should therefore like to
address myself to the follow
ing query: What makes Sam
my run? What makes Sammy
run? What makes sammy run?
In answering this question,
I am laboring under two se
vere restrictions. First, where
as Budd Schulberg could de
vote several hundred pages to
unravelling the answer, I
have only two or so hundred
words in which to do it. Sec
ond, Sammy Glick was only
a figment of author Schul
berg's imagination; Sammy
West, on the other hand, is all
too real.
That the Daily Tar H e e 1
should entitle Mr. West's com
ments, "Frat Man's Defense,"
does a gross disservice to the
other fraternity members on
campus. Indeed, it brings to
mind the well-known Jewish
quip "With friends like
this, I need enemies?"
But to get down to brass
tacks. Mr. West wants those
who "resent so much of what
goes on down here" to "get
the hell out of here."
For his information, I will
not leave, nor will I silence
myself. In fact, one could
easily throw his advice back
to him; suggesting that he go
somewhere else is he doesn't
like it here. Unlike his "ideal
society," which has no place
for me, mine does have one
for him. .
And by remaining at UNC,
I, as well as the other sup
posed epicene characters,
may convert him. That cer
tainly is assuming a lot, but
my confidence in his better
judgment is surpassed only
by my belief in the value of
the ultimate objective com
munity. What underlies Mr. West's
attitude is the fear and un
easiness rampant throughout
contemporary society. In an
effort to ally his own con
cern, racial intolerance, sex,
etc., he strikes out against
all who articulate his suspi
cions. How else can one explam
his wholesale labelling as
"homosexual" all dissenters
at Chapel Hill? More than re
flecting any insight into our
ow Waller To Rot
assumed sexual proclivities,
this act, on the contrary,
sheds enormous light on his
sexual insecurity.
If writer West wished to
know what makes me run,
i.e., what caused me to write
this letter, part of the ex
planation is this: by glossing
over the affront to the hu
manity of the Negro young
sters by saying that it "added
a little flavor" to the Beat
Dook parade," he lessened my,
and his, dignity. For to dimi
nish one is to diminish all.
As a colleague of mine so
so astutely observed, the prob
lem is not between white man
and black amn, nor between
Northerner and Southerner,
but between man and man.
Ernest J. Yanarella
Women, Heed!
Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
Mr. Greenbacker:
Despite the opening chal
lenge of your article "Dirty
Old Men Show Contempt for
Women" in last Wednesday's
DTH, I read the column, in
temperate language and all.
It made me sad. Sad be
cause I must agree (although
not willingly) with many of
the points you so bluntly pre
sented. Despite several unhappy
truths brought out in your
column and other recent DTH
stories aimed unfavorably at
the TCC, I think it time some
one spoke in defense of the
girls on campus lest they be
forever unduly branded.
I do not believe that the so
called TCC is in majority on
this campus. It looks as if
your lecherous friend has
-- not been too discerning in
choosing female companion
ship, and; : unfortunately;:' has
j based his contempt pn.the be-;
havior of a very feWiU
f Had he a little more" per-1
ception, a little more experi
ence in life himself, he might
know that there are individ
uals on this campus well
worth the time if he . were
willing to seek them out.
Had he a little more imagi
nation too, he might offer his
date more than the usual juke
box frat party or the Satur
day night heer bust. He could
instead plan ahead and dare
to do something a little differ
ent, and I don't mean some
thing that takes more money.
So often I get the feeling
the Carolina Gentleman is
afraid to talk or assumes his
. date is not capable of speak
ing intelligently. If all he
wants is a live body to ac
company him to Saturday
night oblivion, than a TCC is
all he deserves.
Many girls, I think, feel
cheated when they are con
stantly escorted to the usual
fiascoes. How can a girl ex
press anything of consequence
with the blaring of the juke
box ringing in her ears or if
her date is in the fifth dimen
sion? I think this lecherous friend
of yours should expect a little
more from his dates. That is,
he should let her know he ap
preciates intelligent- conversa
tion and "individuality. If he
"would be considerate, too, I
think he would find that not
only does the coed perk up to
the challenge, but the two of
them will actually enjoy each
other.
If he gets no response to
this treatment, then indeed he
has found a TCC. At least he
has discovered the fact early
and does not have to call her
again.
In the past controversies be
tween the TCC and the Caro
lina Gentleman have raged
and waned, accomplishing lit
tle more than the airing of in
coherent and ill-founded com
plaints. Your column, sir, was an
eye-opener. And I hope the
coeds read it carefully.
Donna Reifanider
0'$fT mi
ff XL v&y
A s4. A& Wh (
W ' ' -V 'i X
tmntf 7rKH6Gl-
f-
in
-if