12The Daily Tar HeelFriday, October 23, 1937
lailg
95th year of editorial freedom
Jill Gerber, Editor
DEIRDRE FALLON, Managing Editor
SALLY PEARSALL, Newt Editor
JEAN LUTES, University Editor
DONNA LEINWAND, State and National Editor
JEANNIE FARIS, City Editor
JAMES SUROWIECKI, Sports Editor
FEUSA NEURINGER, Business Editor
JUUE BRASWELL, Features Editor
Elizabeth Ellen, Am Editor
Charlotte Cannon, Photography Editor
CATHY McHUGH, Omnibus Editor
Readers' Forum
Don't tread on Shakespeare
board
opinion
Shakespeare -may
be banned
from two-year
community college :
bookstores in
Marin County, Calif., not for ethical
reasons, but as the result of economic
pressure.
Last week the county superior court
ruled that the California Education
Code did not allow the state's 106
community colleges to sell any books
not specifically recommended by
faculty members for their courses.
Now, the decision applies only to the
community college in Marin County.
The ruling resulted from a lawsuit
filed by two local bookstores, which
argued that the college bookstores
were violating the state code and
taking away their business. The code
says community colleges may sell
textbooks or books specifically used
in a course, and stops there.
Thus, if Faulkner is not being taught
during a particular semester, then the
bookstore will not be allowed to sell
his works. The same goes for Milton,
Tolstoy, Nietzsche and on and on.
This policy is contradictory to the
nature of education. The college
experience is designed to instill an
interest in literature in students and
encourage them to read a wide range
of books. The ruling reinforces the
narrow-minded attitude that books are
only to be read for classes, that reading
for pleasure is not a valid part of an
education.
If a student carries anything from
his education into the real world, it
should be a love of reading that will
continue to expose him to new ideas.
A lawyer for the two private book
stores said that the suit fought the
college's providing "a full-service
bookstore," which would compete
with the local stores. But there is no
better place for a full-service bookstore
than within an educational institution.
It is ridiculous for business interests
to interfere with a student's access to
a variety of books within the college.
In North Carolina, the Umstead Act
permits the sale of any book within
state university bookstores. The battle
in California may seem distant, but
as recently as three years ago, N.C.
State bookstore customers were asked
for university identification before
being allowed to purchase books, to
ensure that competition between the
university and private bookstores was
kept to a minimum.
This example of the public vs.
private conflict is less drastic than that
in California, but the struggle still
exists. North Carolina legislators
should keep the Umstead Act airtight,
protecting the general distribution of
literature from the interests of private
business.
Almost live from New York
With conservatism pervading nearly
all corners of American life in the
1980s, any outburst of irreverence or
individuality is a welcome breath of
fresh air. For 13 years, "Saturday
Night Live" has attracted young
audiences to network television with
satirical sketches that were often
considered too outlandish for prime
time.
But many of the sketches aired
during SNL's glory days in the 1970s
would never get past network censors
today. Lome Michaels, who produced
the show for the first five years and
the last two, once won arguments with
network censors. He now finds that
things have changed.
"There isn't a week in which four
or five things aren't suggested that we
think would be funny and the best
thing on that subject and we can't do
them," Michaels said. "The network
does not want a controversial show."
Although controversial scripts
sometimes had been left on the shelf
in the past, censors began banning
sketches last season that had already
aired with network approval. Richard
Guttner, NBC's censor-in-residence
who prefers to think of himself as an
editor, demanded that a sketch about
a blind man and a homosexual be
removed from a re-run show, despite
having already aired with his consent.
He also insisted that a drug-abuse
sketch called "What's My Addiction?"
be removed from the re-run of a show
hosted by Paul Schaffer.
Despite a lack of angry letters after
the shows aired in their original form,
Guttner said network officials felt they
dealt with themes that were "difficult
to get across within a humorous
context."
But instead of a puritanical
approach to network television, NBC
officials actually believe that a less
controversial SNL will be more
marketable and rake in more adver
tising mega-bucks. By demanding that
SNL ignore such difficult themes as
drug abuse and homosexuality, cen
sorship threatens to destroy the social
satire that made the show a comedy
trailblazer in the 1970s.
With viewers that have become
accustomed to uncensored comedy on
cable television, a watered-down SNL
risks fading into a shadow of its earlier
years. After 13 years on the air,
seemingly pious network censors
should realize that offended viewers
can take Don Pardo's voice as a
warning of vulgarity and switch
channels to the late movie maybe
something nice and tame like "Scar
face." Mike Mackay
The Daily Tar Heel
Editorial Writers: Jim Grcenhill, Mike Mackay, Brian McCuskey and Jon Rust.
Editorial Assistants: Julia Coon and Sharon Kebschull.
Assistant Managing Editors: Cara Bonnett, Melissa Daniels, Peter Lineberry and Mandy Spence.
News: Kari Barlow, Jeanna Baxter, Lydtan Bernhardt, Matt Bivens, Brenda Campbell, Staci Cox, Meg
Craddock, Sandy Dimsdale, Carrie Dove, Laurie Duncan, Mark Folk, Gerda Gallop, Alissa Grice,
Lindsay Hayes, Kyle Hudson, Michael Jackson, Kelly Johnson, Michael Jordan, Helen Jones, Susan
Kauffman, Sharon Kebschull, Hunter Lambeth, Will Lingo, Barbara Linn, Brian Long, Mitra Lotfi,
Lynne McClintock, Brian McCollum, Leigh Ann McDonald, Justin McGuire, Stephanie Marshall,
Laurie Martin, Myrna Miller, Smithson Mills, Lee Ann Necessary, Rebecca Nesbit, Susan Odenkirchen,
Cheryl Pond, Amy Powell, Charla Price, Andrea Shaw, Mandy Spence, William Taggart, Clay Thorp,
Nicki Weisensee and Amy Winslow. Brian Long, assistant business editor. Kimberly Edens and Kristen
Gardner, assistant university editors.
Sports: Mike Berardino, Patton McDowell and Chris Spencer, assistant sports editors. Robert D'Arruda,
Steve Giles, Dave Glenn, Dave Hall, Clay Hodges, Brendan Mathews, Jim Muse, Andy Podolsky,
and Langston Wertz.
Features: Hannah Drum, Carole Ferguson, Laura Jenkins, Corin Ortlam, Lynn Phillips, Leigh Pressley,
Karen Stegman, Kathy Wilson and Julie Woods.
Arts: James Burrus, Scott Cowen, Stephanie Dean, Kim Donehower, David Hester, Julie Olson, Beth
Rhea, Kelly Rhodes, Alston Russell and Richard Smith.
Photography: Tony Deifell, David Minton, Matthew Plyler and Julie Stovall.
Copy Editors: Karen Bell, Cara Bonnett, Carrie Burgin, Julia Coon, Whitney Cork, Laurie Duncan,
Bert Hackney, Lisa Lorentz, Toby Moore, Rachel Stiffler and Kaarin Tisue, assistant news editor.
Cartoonists: Jeff Christian, Bill Cokas and Greg Humphreys.
Campus Calendar: Mindelle Rosenberg.
Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, general manager; Patricia Glance, advertising director; Joan
Worth, advertising coordinator; Peggy Smith, advertising manager; Sheila Baker, business manager;
Michael Benfield, Lisa Chorebanian, Ashley Hinton, Kellie McElhaney, Chrissy Mennitt, Stacey
Montford, Lesley Renwrick, Julie Settle, Dave Slovensky, Dean Thompson, Amanda Tilley and Wendy
Wenger, advertising representatives; Stephanie Chesson, classified advertising representative; and Kris
Carlson, secretary.
Distribution Tucker Stevens, manager;
Production: Bill Leslie and Stacy Wynn. Rita Galloway, Leslie Humphrey, Stephanie Locklear and
Tammy Sheldon production assistants.
Alumni Center to help students in long run
To the editor:
As a member of the Student Alumni
Association (S AA), I would like to address
the issue of the new Alumni Center site.
The Order of the Bell Tower, UNC's
chapter of the SAA, functions as a link
between the General Alumni Association
and the students. We are here to stimulate
interest and awareness in UNC's future as
students.
The alumni are in the process of building
a much-needed center to be used for
activities such as homecoming, commence
ment, reunions, sports and other events.
I want to stress that each of you is a future
user of this center. It is not to be used
only by million-dollar donors; it is for
everyone. This will be your home base
when you return to UNC.
The Stadium Drive site of the center was
offered to the alumni by Chancellor
Christopher Fordham and followed the
normal approval process by the Faculty
Committee on Buildings and Grounds, the
Real Property Committee of the Board of
Trustees, the Alumni Steering Committee,
the Executive Committee of the alumni
association and its officers and directors.
This was not done without student
participation; student representatives (the
student body president, the senior class
president, the DTH editor and the SAA
President) sit on the association's board,
and the student body president sits on the
Board of Trustees. Notice was given to the
students in a front-page DTH article when
the decision was made final. The site was
chosen due to its excellent central location,
which will provide access by foot to any
campus event or facility.
Concerns have been raised by students
on the issues of parking and the trees now
on the site. The architect's plans are not
yet in, so it is impossible to address the
specifics of lot assignments at this time.
It is also important to note that the parking
on this campus belongs to the University,
and therefore the University, not the
alumni, will decide how it will be
distributed.
Another asset of this site is the natural
beauty of the land. Every effort is being
made by the architect to nestle the building
into the site; the alumni are every bit as
concerned with preserving the woods and
the walkways as the students. The plans
for the site will enhance its beauty and will
prevent anything unappropriate from
being built there.
As with any issue on campus, it is to
be expected that student opinion will be
divided. This letter has brought forth
several considerations in the hope that you,
as a student and as a future alumnus, will
be able to take an educated stand.
KARIN WEST
Junior
International Studies
Economics
Offensive float
was mistake
To the editor:
As a whole, I feel the home
coming parade Oct. 9 was a
success. The support the resi
dence halls, campus organiza
tions and clubs snowed for the
football team's efforts through
participating in the parade was
outstanding and definitely
should be commended.
Before the parade, Kelly
Clark, Residence Hall Associ
ation president, and I emphas
ized to all participants that
floats were to be tasteful and
focused on school spirit. I
regret, however, that one of the
golf carts in the parade was in
poor taste and had not been
screened out. I am referring to
the cart which read, "Deac's
have AIDS." While I believe
the dormitory's intent was to
promote school spirit, its float
failed to show appropriate
sensitivity to those afflicted
with AIDS. As president of the
Carolina Athletic Association,
it was my responsibility to
eliminate floats in poor taste,
and in this instance, I failed to
do that.
The parade is over now, and
we cannot take back or erase
what has already happened. I
do, however, wish to apologize
to the spectators and partici
pants. The CAA recognizes
that thousands of people die of
AIDS every year, and to make
a joke of something that serious
is wrong and inappropiate. We
respect that there are many
people here in Chapel Hill
dedicating their lives to AIDS
research, and we are sorry for
offending them. And finally,
most importantly, I'd like to
apologize to those watching the
parade who have AIDS. We
did not mean for this to hurt
anyone, and for those that it
did, we are sorry.
We can only apologize, learn
from our mistakes and hope to
do a better, more responsible
job in the future.
CAROL GEER
Junior
Psychology
Don't stop with
ending market
To the editor:
Nominate the DTH staff,
especially Sally Pearsall, for the
1988 Nobel Prize in economics.
Most students probably never
realized you shouldn't invest
more in the market that you
can afford to lose ("Beware of
the Wall Street bear," Oct. 21)
or that corporate raiders are
mm
W- LISTEN'.'....
WONCE
TO PULLTHE PLUG.
Y0U6CTMMT.
WRKFEUA
fcONETDUGH
HOMBRE.
a til m
EM
-J WW M I I
m -, mm iunn
out for profits. Thanks, guys.
Pearsall topped it all off with
her cogent analysis of the stock
market ("Time to stop stock
market madness," Oct. 21). But
why stop with just abolishing
the market? Let's get rid of the
whole free market system.
We're sick and tired of paying
those huge middlemen profits
to ulcer-plagued businessmen
in fancy corporate offices. Get
back to the good old days when
families made or grew every
thing themselves.
Think about it. No money,
no taxes, no budget deficit, no
trade imbalance. No cocaine
crazed MBAs with BMWs and
Rolexes, no Ivan Boesky, no
business ethics problems, no
Medtech scandal. No divest
ment worries. Just good, hon
est Americans back to those
bedrock values that made this
country great. Kinda catchy,
huh?
KATE BLACKMON
Graduate
Business
Banks are
obvious safety
To the editor:
The editorial board has once
again shown its deep insight
into complex problems facing
the world, the nation and the
UNC student. In the editorial
of Oct. 21 ("Beware of the Wall
Street bear"), the board advises
students not to invest in the
stock market in light of the 508
point drop on Monday.
Instead, the board urges stu
dents to put their surplus
money in a bank. To help
support its argument that a
bank is the best place for a
student's money, the board
gives the example of a student
who "made $35 on every share
(of Telerate stock) he bought"
which was "an increase of
nearly 200 percent over the
original price." A student earns
200 percent on his investment
in the stock market, and he's
supposed to put his money in
the bank? Come on.
The board continues its deep
insight with the startling reve
lation, "The people who really
were hurt by Black Monday are
those who came into the market
as short-term investors and
guessed that it would rise." Gee,
I never would have figured that.
Another interesting and little
known fact that the board
brings light: "The small
investor who looks to short
term increases (in the stock
market) is taking a gamble."
The stock market a gamble?
Really? I'm certainly glad that
the board brought this fact to
my attention, as I had always
thought the stock market was
the most risk-free place to
invest my money. All sarcasm
aside, the board should try to
avoid its affinity for stating the
obvious and concentrate on
being journalists, not financial
advisers.
JIM HOCK
Evening College
Bork's sin
is trust
To the editor:
They tried to make Robert
Bork drink the hemlock but he
said, "No, thank you, kind sirs,
youll have to inject me, just for
the record." And the record
shows, among other things,
that the man who led the lynch
Bork committee was unfit to tie
Bork's shoes. But more impor
tantly, the record shows that
Bork was not judged on his
character and competence but
on his judicial philosophy. This
new criteria for judging
Supreme Court nominees
exposed him to the influence
of public opinion to the point
where he was being forced to
make campaign promises con
cerning how he would vote in
future . cases. When Bork
refused to play the politician,
he was accused of putting cold,
constitutional analysis ahead of
sensitivity for the people.
This violation of the inde
pendence of the judiciary came
about because Bork threatened
the social agenda of a political
faction that could not enforce
its agenda through democratic
means. Forced busing, racial
quotas and abortion on
demand are the main planks in
this agenda that has been
imposed on the electorate by
the most undemocratic branch
of government, the judiciary.
Now we are supposed to accept
these modern social experi
ments as being mainstream, as
if we had a voice in their
creation. Bork's terrible sin is
his habit of deferring decisions
to the people whenever he can't
find a clear answer in the
Constitution. But this is a sin
only in the eyes of those who
do not trust the people.
On the eve of the Bork
election, I am reminded of a
verse from an old Bob Dylan
tune, "Come senators, con
gressmen, please heed the call
Dont stand in the doorway,
don't block up the hall."
ALAN CULTON
Senior
Political Science
We goofed
Thursday's editorial "When
the safety of home erodes"
incorrectly said that Aug. 20
was a Saturday. It was a
Thursday. The Daily Tar Heel
regrets the error.
Take Econ 10 before playing stockbroker
To the editor:
Wow! It's a good thing we consulted
Wednesday's DTH for financial advice
before we plunged into the stock market!
We didn't know that putting money in a
bank was safer than investing in the
market. And with such influential thinkers
proposing the abolition of the stock
market, we might have lost our shirts!
Seriously, the only thing that the board
opinion editorial ("Beware of the Wall
Street bear?) and Sally Pearsall's column
("Time to stop stock market madness")
showed readers was a complete lack of
understanding as to how the stock market
works and its position in the nation's
economy.
You don't have to take Stocks and
Bonds 101 to realize that investing in the
market is a risk. The board lamented that
small investors don't have a say in the
fluctuation of stocks. That's why they are
small investors. Besides, who does have a
say in the way stocks move? Stock moves
by the overall public perception of each
corporation, not by the whims of one
individual. .
The board also cogently observed that
students "would be wiser to put (their
money) in a bank than in the stock
market." Why? If they invest wisely, the
return on their stocks is likely to be much
greater than the interest yielded from a
conventional savings account.
Pearsall's column expresses even more
inane thoughts on the market. She says,
"Analysts offer all kinds of crazy ideas to
explain the ups and downs of stock." These
analysts are only relaying what they see
troubling the public, the investors. It goes
back to the bit about public perception.
She goes on to cite the analysts
discussion of Monday's bombing of two
Iranian oil drilling platforms as a catalyst
for the collapse. This was regarded by most
analysts as a secondary factor. But is that
so crazy? If a company you invested in
has Middle ' Eastern interests, what will
happen to those interests if the United
States goes to war with Iran? To say they
would be threatened is a grand
understatement.
But the most absurd idea of all is the
suggestion that the stock market should
be abolished. The stock market is the
foundation of American business. To
abolish the stock market would be to take
the backbone out of the capitalist system.
Corporations would lack the necessary
capital to grow and invest on an interna
tional scale. What about foreign investors
. 1 TT O
wun interests in u.o. luiuioiiuiiai
Ditching the stock market would have a
dire impact on economies around the
world.
The corporations wouldn't be the only
ones to suffer. To note just one pertinent
example, what about our, University's
endowment? UNC could not experience
the tremendous growth it now enjoys.
Even the brokers on Wall Street would
admit that the stock market is just a
sophisticated crap shoot. But to suggest
getting rid of it is tantamount to saying
the United States should step back in time.
, Maybe the DTH staff should step into an
economics class before putting its foot in
its mouth.
DAVE GAVIN
Senior
' Accounting
JIM ZOOK
Senior
Journalism Political Science