10The Daily Tar HeelWednessday, September 13, 1989
97th year of editorial freedom
Sharon Kebschull, Editor
WILLIAM TAGGART, Managing Editor
MARY Jo DUNNINGTON, Editorial Page Editor JULIA COON, News Editor
JUSTIN McGuiRE, University Editor JENNY ClONINGER, University Editor
TAMMY BlaCKARD, State and National Editor CHARLES BriTTAIN, City Editor
TOM PARKS, Business Editor CARA BONNETT, Arts and Features Editor
Dave Glenn, Sports Editor Kelly Thompson, Omnibus Editor
MELANIE BLACK, Design Editor KlM AVETTA, Design Editor
DAVID SUROWIECKI, Photography Editor
Give Phoenix funds
Campus publications need system
board
opinion
Tonight Student -Congress
will vote
on whether to allo
cate funds to a stu-
dent publication The Phoenix for
the purchase of a desktop publishing
system. Leaders of The Phoenix and
another campus publication, Cellar Door,
submitted the request to congress in the
belief that an investment in a state-of-the-art
system would benefit the Univer
sity community and many student publi
cations in several ways.
At a first glance, it might seem diffi
cult to justify the expenditure of what is
admittedly a large sum of money to such
small campus organizations. The system
proposed by Phoenix editor Ed Davis
and Cellar Door co-editor Aarre Laakso
would require an initial outlay of more
than $20,000, around $12,000 of which
would come from the publications' own
funds. The major part of the system would
be leased, with plans that congress would
allocate around $18,000 over the next
two years to renew the lease agreement.
. But the benefits of such an investment
do justify the costs. A good desktop
system would allow student publications
to do more and to do it faster and
better. Members of the University com
munity would then have access to news
papers and magazines which would be
more timely and of better quality.
Of almost equal importance, however,
is that the purchase of a desktop system
would give more students a chance to
learn layout and editing on the same
technologically advanced equipment
used by major publications. Because the
mission of the University is to educate
and learning does not just take place in
the classroom the chance to provide
students with a system which would
enhance their education is not one to miss.
In addition, the point of the proposal is not
to provide only The Phoenix and Cellar
Door staff members access to the equip
ment. The system would be available to
other student publications, such as The Black
Ink and Yackety Yack, thus benefiting many
more young publishers and journalists, as
well as their readers.
Management of the system does, how
ever, present a problem which would require
unwavering commitment and flexibility on
the part of the Phoenix staff, who would be
the primary users of the equipment. Part of
Davis' argument in favor of the system is
that it would reduce the time his staff has to
spend putting the paper together each week.
Using time spent on the system efficiently
would be very important if other organiza
tions are to benefit as well.
It is not at all unrealistic, however, to
expect several organizations to be able to use
the system on a regular basis. The proposed
system is compatible with the numerous
Macintosh computers in computer labs and
dorms across campus. Thus, much of the
work that goes into a publication could be
done outside of the office, leaving the sys
tem free for later steps in the production
process. And the system is one that can be
expanded in the future at minimal cost to the
publications.
Student Congress should recognize the
benefits that would be realized through the
allocation. In the long run, use of the desktop
system would reduce Phoenix costs, mean
ing the paper should be able to operate with
a smaller allocation of student fees. At the
same time, The Phoenix should recognize its
responsibility both to manage the system
such that many student organizations can
have equal access and to effectively use its
improved product to gain advertising to
finance its operations.
Respect student's rights
Campbell's alcohol code goes too far
Campus police officers at UNC were re- ation, the university's should keep alcohol off
cently given jurisdiction on roads that pass campus but beyond that, asking campus police
through or are immediately adjacent to cam- to stop or report students who are legally able to
pus. That didn't dramatically strengthen their drink is unjust.
power, but to give the same power to the
campus police at Campbell University in
Buies Creek scares, with good reason, the
university's already-scrutinized students.
Campbell, a Baptist gg,
Asking campus police n,
21,evenifthey weren t
more conservative in . . , '.. ; , .
thelastfewyears, while tO tum 111 Students OVer P? use
. and the situation at
many colleges have keyj j n jiff
relaxed their powers 21 wllO drink IS UnjUSt. enTP '
over students private
lives. The university
Administrators say that they see their role as
surrogate parents, that that is one of the reasons
for their existence. But most students would be
surprised if their par
ents refused to let them
gives students demerits when they break the
school's conduct code, and a student with 20
points may be expelled. The problem is, the
students must follow the code even when
they're off campus, and part of the code
forbids students from drinking alcohol any
where. Students who organized one party
with alcohol, for example, were not allowed
to attend their graduation ceremonies, and
their diplomas were withheld for about three
months.
' University officials seem to believe that
college students are unable to conduct them
selves with some semblance of dignity. While
students may still be in the process of grow
ing up, treating them as if they need a babysit
ter at 19 or 21 years of age does little to
contribute to their maturity. And at 21, stu
dents should be allowed to drink at least
off campus. Because of its religions affili-
Besides treating its
students like children, the university treads on
thin ground when it gives its police officers such
wide powers. The police have expressed con
cerns that students can run off campus onto
adjacent highways and be out of the officers' ju
risdiction. While this is a valid concern, their
powers should not be extended to cover anything
more than adjacent roads to allow them to
follow up on students who are at home or around
town smacks of totalitarian control by the univer
sity. In today's enlightened society, universities
should realize that students are adults they
may slip up and act rather childishly sometimes,
but they still deserve to be treated as adults and
they should be expected to act accordingly. When
they don't, then Campbell has the right to take
action. But when they follow the law, even if it's
a law Campbell disagrees with, they should be
left alone. Sharon Kebschull
The Daily Tar Heel
Editorial Writers: James Burroughs and Jennifer Wing.
Assistant Editors: Jessica Yates, arts; Jessica Lanning, city; Myrna Wi3tr, features; Staci Cox, managing; Anne
Isenhower and Steve Wilson, news; Lisa Reichle and Richard Smith, Omnibus; Andrew Podolsky, Jay Reed and Jamie
Rosenberg, sports; Karen Dunn, state and national; Will Spears and Amy Wajda, university;
Writers: Craig Allen, Kari Barlow, Crystal Bernstein, Sarah Cagle, Brenda Campbell, Terri Canaday, James Coblin, Blake
Dickinson, Mark Folk, Julie Gammill, Jada Harris, Joey Hill, Susan Holdsclaw, Jason Kelly, Lloyd Lagos, Tracy Lawson, Rheta
Logan, Jeff Lutrell, Alan Martin, Kimberly Maxwell, Helle Nielsen, Glenn O'Neal, Simone Pam, Gus Papas, Tom Parks, Jannette
Pippin, Karl Pfister, Mike Sutton, Laura Taylor, Emilie Van Poucke, Stephanie von Isenburg, Sandy Wall, Sherry Waters, Chuck
Williams, Nancy Wykle and Faith Wynn.
Sports: Neil Amato, Mark Anderson, Jason Bates, John Bland, Christina Frohock, Scott Gold, Doug Hoogervorst, David
Kupstas, Bethany Litton, Bobby McCroskey, Natalie Sekicky and Eric Wagnon.
Arts and Features: Cheryl Allen, Lisa Antonucci, Randy Basinger, Clark Benbow, Ashley Campbell, Diana Florence, Carrie
McLaren, Elizabeth Murray, Leigh Pressley, Hasanthika Sirisena and Kim Stallings.
Photography: Evan Eile, Steven Exum, Regina Holder, Tracey Langhome and Kathy Michel.
Copy Editors: B Buckberry, Joy Golden, Angela Hill, Susan Holdsclaw and Clare Weickert.
Editorial Assistant: Mark Chilton.
Design Assistants: Kim Avetta and Melanie Black.
Cartoonists: Jeff Christian, Pete Corson, David Estoye and Mike Sutton.
Business and Advertising: Kevin Schwartz, director; Patricia Glance, advertising director; Leslie Humphrey, classified ad
manager; Kirsten Burkart, assistant classified ad manager; Amanda Tilley, advertising manager; Sabrina Goodson, business
manager; Allison Ashworth, assistant business manager; Lora Gay, Kristi Greeson, Beth Harding, Lavonne Leinster, Tracy
Proctor, Kevin Reperowitz, Alicia Satterwhite, Pam Thompson and Jill Whitley, display advertising representatives; Kim Blass,
creative director; Pam Strickland, marketing director; Sherrie Davis, Ingrid Jones, Shannon Kelly and Tammy Newton, sales
assistants; Jeff Carlson, office manager.
Subscriptions: Ken Murphy, manager.
Distribution: RDS Carriers.
Production: Bill Leslie and Stacy Wynn, managers; Anita Bentley, assistant manager; Stephanie Locklear, assistant.
Printing: The Village Companies.
Music's terrible top 1 0 grows to 20
Both figuratively and literally, I have this
awful recurring daydream that in the grand
Class of Life, haven't done the summer
reading. That is, I sort of half-believe that
everyone around me knows exactly what is
going on, that they're all involved in some
elaborate play that is pre-scripted into duping
me into thinking that this is real life.
At least that's the only rational explanation
I can think of to explain how Billboard's Top
40 songs work; either they are involved in
some master plan, like absurdist cinema, to
make me think that the whole country actually
likes the diarrhea that cascades out of the
radios of America, or else there is some mild
hallucinogen mixed into the fluoride of the
country's water supply that makes us look at
Paula Abdul and see Yahweh or something.
Or . . . I'm so hopelessly out of touch with the
pulse of America that I should give up writing,
music and psychology for some more useful
career goals like welding or being a cutesy
weatherman or knitting myself a giant afghan.
"Why so caustic, Mr. Columnist?" I hear
you cry, "Didst thou eat something disagreeable?"
Nay, but I shall tell you what has brought on
my vexed ire: Driving from Cedar Rapids,
Iowa to Chapel Hill last weekend forced me to
listen to Kasey Kasem's entire American Top
40 five times in two different time zones, and
somewhere in Kentucky I just about lost my
burrito listening to "Funky Cold Medina" for
the fifth time. Not to mention that I was later
riveted, much like passing motorists are to a
bizarre livestock truck accident, to the MTV
Video Awards Show, and after watching my
most hated stars prance around on stage like
hemorrhoid poster children, I began to feel,
well, a little crotchety.
A couple of years ago, I proffered my list of
top 10 Worst Modern Popular Songs in Exis
tence. They are (in ascending order of hatred):
10. "Makin' Love Out of Nothing At All" - Air
Supply; 9. "In the Navy" - The Village People;
8. "Wild Boys" - Duran Duran; 7. "Shake
Your Booty" - K.C. & the Sunshine Band; 6.
"All I Need" - Jack Wagner, 5. "I Wanna
Dance With Somebody" - Whitney Houston;
4. "Angel of the Morning" - Juice Newton; 3.
"Rock Me Amadeus" - Falco; 2. "Cum On
Feel the Noize" - Quiet Riot; and, of course,
the worst song in the history of Man:
Ian Williams
Wednesday's Child
1. "Electric Avenue" by Eddy Grant.
Since then, folks have asked me to round
out the Top 20, and now I feel just about
cranky enough to do so. So here are the next 1 0
nails in the coffin:
10. "Superman" - R.E.M. Like a three
minute root canal, I'm always relieved when
this song is finished. "Ahh ..." I sigh gently,
"I heard 'Superman' again and I didn't freak
out ..."
9. "Wild Thing" - The Troggs I figure it's
about time someone laid this sadly retarded
crunchy frat classic to rest, and I'd love to
volunteer. Strange as it may seem, this was the
number one song in the country when I was
ejected from the warm comfort of the womb.
What's even more fun is seeing what was
number one while your parents were in the
heat of your rapturous conception. Aptly
enough for my now bitterly-divorced parents,
I was conceived while Frank Sinatra crooned
"Strangers in the Night."
8. "Wild Thing" - Tone Loc I don't know
how Monsieur Loc racked up one of the most
successful songs in music history by croaking
his sexual woes to a Van Halen guitar lick, but
I must admit that 'That's what happens when
bodies start slappin'" pretty much sums up a
lot of key emotional problems Tone may be
experiencing.
7. "Rock On" - Michael Damian This
manicured bozo face-god wiener bonehead
poser soap opera wuss doesn't deserve a free
condom, let alone a top ten hit.
6. "Puppy Love" - Donny Osmond His
new songs may be worse, but this is just for the
grief he caused me in grade school. Being
Mormon while he and Marie ice skated to
their megahits of the mid-70's was a secret I
unsuccessfully tried to hide from other, much
larger and dare I say unappreciative purple
sock fans in third grade. Curse you, Don . . .
5. "I Saw (Him) Standing There" - Tif
fany This brutal rape and surgical regender
ing of a classic Beatles tune should not have
gone unpunished. But alas, I shall have the last
laugh. Before she even gets old enough to
drink a Budweiser legally, she'll be languishing
in that private hell in the Record Bar known as
Mr. Bargain Bin.
4. "Once Bitten, Twice Shy" - Great White
This song only has two chords, much like the
songs my baby sister made up in the bathtub
while she was drowning the cat. I ought to ask
her what she thinks of this one.
3. "Total Eclipse of the Heart" - Bonnie
Tyler And to think I had forgotten about this
song until a girl played it ad nauseum in a hotel
room over Labor Day! How pleasant my life had
been, sailing along in relative bliss, nary a care
in the world, looking at clouds and counting the
flowers until suddenly I heard it . . ." turn around,
bright eyes ..."
2. "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" -Wham!
"Wake me up before you go-go. Don't
leave me hanging on like a yo-yo." Radio waves
travel out of our galaxy, you know. That one
should be hitting the Sirian Solar System in
about two years. Pretty scary, huh.
1. "Hangin Tough" - New Kids on the
Block I have discovered my weakness. Achilles
had his heel, Superman had kryptonite, Napo
leon had his Waterloo, the Death Star had that
little porthole - and now I have mine. I have seen
the enemy and it's name is The New Kids on the
Block. Without serious visual aids, I cannot
express how much I loathe this quintet of anti
musicians; suffice to say that when I die,
Beethoven, George Gershwin, Elvis, John Len
non and I will be waiting for them in hell with
crowbars and a smile.
Almost all of these songs are brand spankin'
new! So where does that leave us? Twenty years
ago, in 1 969, there were 16 number one songs for
the whole year. This year, by my calculations,
there will be about 40. Do you know what this
means? We've entered an era of completely
recyclable music, shrink-wrapped and dispos
able like a douche or dental floss or a Zagnut bar!
Soon we'll get albums in all flavors and pack
ages at a big musical supermarket!
"Frosted Madonna-Berry Crunch, only
$4.99!" White Lion Head Cheese! Antifungal
ExposC Ointment! Vinegar and Water New
Kids on the Block!
God, I can't wait ...
Ian Williams, from Los Angeles, Calif, is a
senior music and psychology major although he
obviously has trouble with both.
Readers9 For em
Phoenix computers
have wide support
Editor's note: Laakso is the
co-editor of the Cellar Door and
Davis is the editor of The Phoe
nix. To the editor:
We appreciate this opportunity
to inform the UNC community of
an exciting proposal which will
dramatically enhance the quality
of every student's life. Tonight,
the Student Congress will vote on
a bill that allocates about $ 12,000
to The Phoenix for the purchase
of the parts of a desktop publish
ing system which would save the
students more than $30,000 over
the next 10 years, as well as pro
vide innumerable benefits to stu
dents and student organizations.
The isolated resistance to the
bill seems to have been based on
jealousy between rival publica
tions and misunderstandings of
the bill and the contents of our
proposal. In particular, we were
baffled by Kyle Hudson and An
thony WoodlieFs (representing
The Catalyst and The Carolina
Critic) hostility toward the bill
("Phoenix not worthy of new
computers," Sept. 12). Their hos
tility is particularly puzzling in
light of the support of the bill by
more than 10 campus organiza
tions and student leaders, includ
ing The Black Ink, Yackety Yack,
Student Television and the presi
dent of the Carolina Union Ac
tivities Board.
It is rare that a bill with so many
supporters and such obvious bene
fits is presented to Student Con
gress. It is a shame that The Critic
and The Catalyst, for whatever
reason, are unwilling to join the
R&toTH THE AIP &F tOLOrMAN oFfCAiS Trl
QOVfcRNMtNJ rip' hnm-li HNi.QVfcR.bP
. i .
ir v oi r MAM Pf-LilN!) TUv -A-AIWC -
LAfcTSt ...
nc f aii At) C lfMTU kC r tr auV. -tti at.u,
r iuwiirv vr uniix irlni hrVr
IM THIS CDWW...x6
lAYTOYM 'SSV.
A.
WE K ue KM XT ...
...THE MGRfCAN Cajual mSER ,
pf-rDE t u;e mv) xt...
overwhelming chorus of support.
The cost of a system adequate
for the intense needs of so many
diverse groups and individuals is
about $42,000. We feel that the
$12,000 we are asking congress
to appropriate this year and the
$ 1 8,000 over the next two years is
a small amount to ask for in view
of the numerous benefits which it
offers over the long term. There is
no way that such a system could
be offered for use by students
without the cooperation of The
Phoenix, Cellar Door and Student
Congress. Having spent the sum
mer researching the costs and
benefits of desktop publishing,
searching for the best possible
prices and financing alternatives
and working at Apple Computer
on a similar system, we feel that
we are best qualified to assess
the desktop publishing needs of
the University community.
We have worked tirelessly and
unselfishly to design and imple- We gOOfed
ment tne most versatile computer
system possible while incurring
the least possible cost to the stu
dents. It would be a tragedy if this
bill, with such widespread sup
port and obvious benefits and
value for every student organiza
tion, was not passed unanimously
by your representatives in the
Student Congress.
Philosophy
ED DAVIS
Junior
Journalism
AARRE LAAKSO
Junior
The editorial "Home needs
house: AIDS patients have a right
to shelter" (board opinion, Sept.
12), contained several errors.
There is no formal task force
studying the AIDS house idea
the proponents are individuals
from several local churches.
In addition, the next town
meeting to discuss the issue will
be Oct. 10.
The DTH regrets the errors.
Class of '93 should get to vote on SRC
To the editor
The Daily Tar Heel editorial board has a
curious definition of democracy ("Value stu
dent vote: Don't give rec center a second
chance," Sept. 1). It opposes Student Con
gress Rep. Jeffrey Beall's (Dist. 7) call for a
second referendum on whether to build a
student recreation center because the student
body has already been given the opportunity
to vote for the SRC. As the board sees it, "in
a democracy the minority must live with
the majority decision, and 'best two out of
three is not an option."
Fortunately for all of us, in a real democ
racy this is not so. Were we to run the country
that way we might still be stuck with some of
the dreadful decision's we have made (Lyndon
Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Jimmy Carter
just to name a few). But in a real democracy,
the public is allowed to reconsider its deci
sions once new information is brought to
light. Beall has introduced a bill which calls
for a new referendum on the SRC because
several important changes have occurred since
the original vote last February.
The most important change which has
occurred since the original vote is that the
people who will actually be required to begin
paying for this monstrosity, the class of 1993,
are now part of the student body. In case you
freshmen didn't know it, while you were
waiting for an acceptance letter from the
admissions office, we were voting to raise
your student fees so you can have the rec
center you didn't know you wanted or needed.
This bit of information probably fills many
of you with a strange desire to toss several
large crates of tea into university lake. Don't
worry, that's just a normal reaction to taxation
without representation. And let's face it, that
is exactly what happened last February. We
decided to raise taxes (student fees) on the
class of '93, and they weren't even invited to
the polls. If there were no other reason to call
Tor a second referendum on the SRC, it would
be sufficient to note this one fact. Student
government is obligated to give the people
who will foot the bill for this thing a chance to
be heard.
Nevertheless, there are other reasons to
reconsider the SRC. Mr. Beall and Rep.
Andrew Cohen (Dist. 7) have compiled con
siderable data to demonstrate that very few, if
any, students are actually unable to gain ac
cess to adequate fitness equipment. If the
issue is once again put up before the student
body, this new information will be discussed,
and the voters will be able to go to the polls
better prepared to make a decision.
The board also suggests that there is some
thing wrong with subjecting the SRC to this
kind of scrutiny. They assert that Student
Congress should "take a look at all the various
things for which student fees are used." To
which I say, "Fine." And let's begin with the
biggest program of all, the SRC. We can take
up questions about whether we should fund,
for example, various campus publications later.
But we need to start somewhere, and the size
of the SRC program along with its dubious
usefulness make it the ideal place.
Finally there is the issue of the increase in
tuition and fees which took place after the initial
referendum. The DTH board protests that stu
dents "did not vote for the SRC on the condition
that if tuition rates went up, plans for the center
would be reconsidered." True, but then that was
not an option on the ballot. Had such an amend
ment been proposed who knows what would
have happened? But let's apply a little common
sense here. If your rent increases by $20 a month
in September, wouldn't you think twice about
ordering cable television? Perhaps the folks on
the DTH editorial board don't need to worry
about staying within a tight budget, but most of
us do. Now that the cost for school has gone up
(and may again next year) most students are
trying to find a way to balance their budgets. The
last thing most of them need is another increase
in fees a few years down the road.
In any case, the merits of the SRC can and
should be discussed once the referendum has
been announced. For the time being it is impor
tant to focus on the issue before us, and that issue
is whether to let students of the class of '93 have
a say in how their money is spent. Anyone but
the most narrow-minded bureaucrat knows that
the answer to that question is a resounding yes.
We must remember that student fees belong to'
students not student government.
ROBERT L. LUKEFAHR JR.
- Senior
Political Science