,2002\
Page 3
The Blue Banner
April 4,2002
Lena Burns Editor-in-Chief
Rachel Grumpier News Editor ,
Ed Fickle Features and Photo Editor
HoUie Childers Sports Editor
J.P. Ammons Assistant Photo Editor
Opinions
Luke Knox Managing Editor
Deleon Dendy Copy Desk Editor
C.J. Eland Online Editor
Emily Schell Advertising Manager
Mark West Faculty Advisor
Blue Banner Editorials
society in
□rous and
are con
in a legal
n the taxi
the sym-
bout how
ernal and
ir Israelis
le Israeli
th regard
)e wrong,
:s do not
1 plan to
s.
Palestin-
le careless
Nazis” to
le side or
le Israelis
: toward a
; this per-
ich today
> demons
mination
can also
need are
fashion
ill enable
ns to live
f the late
ichai, “If
iceofwar.
atureand
>r Jewish
leck, I at(
e in Cafe
tile hikes
isands of
lugh cam-
I ve dorms
tury (o
ige, those
leak).
CA that!
n finding
in?
ir by stu-
a respon-
ibout the
. UNCA
’he Blue
mi adver-
ift
e tailpipe
it’s still a
n anony-
e nuclear
xecutive
series of
reporter
[derstand
or a long
our man
)ur belief
: highest
and eco-
table and
pay for i
:wealthi
ion. Out
president
)iological
jy terror-
th a sense
jrill.Go
Clearing up misconceptions
Lately, several rumors have been floating around about various quotes found in The
Blue Banner and how they came to be. Several quotes may appear misconstrued or so
rightfully outrageous that they seem as though they cannot be true, but we at The Blue
Banner have a strict policy on interviews.
Our interview policy says that all interviews must be recorded on tape, and no article
will be published without submission of the interview tape.
In doing so, we eliminate the possibility for misquotes. If what one says on tape is
inaudible or not easily understood. The Banner will not use that quote in the story.
We require all our writers to tape interviews in case quote individuals later come to
us and claim he or she did not say that. In such a case, we can easily access this tape
recording and play it back to him or her, and prove what he or she said really was
what was on tape.
We at The Banner want to clear up any rumors that we "make up quotes" or "mis
quote" anyone, ever. If anyone would like to dispute our claim, we will be more than
happy to playback a disputed quote.
Based on the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, we reserve
the right to publish any quote we deem necessary to a story, and assertions that The
Blue Banner, in any way, falsifies or makes up quotes is false. The staff and editors are
in a training process to prepare for a career in journalism, and based on our own code
! of ethics, we will never misquote or falsify a quote. Ever.
UNCA needs The Blue Banner
Much has been said about the UNCA Blue Banner and its staff over the course of the
entire 2001-02 school year. Students, alumni, faculty and staff alike have all voiced
their displeasure with some of the hair-raising articles, editorials and opinion columns
written by its staff members.
They range from topics such as diversity on campus (where is it?), cheerleading (its
still not a sport!), the Arts 310 and Humanities programs (do we really need them?).
Homecoming (it's lame!), SGA (what do they actually do?) and its elections (they're
pointless), and let's not forget about the notorious Shaun Cashman opinion column
written last spring.
Many have felt insulted by these various things that have appeared in The Blue Ban
ner. However, as badly as you may hate some of the things we print, you subcon
sciously need and want us to print them.
It's true, just think about it. If we did publish a newspaper that covered nothing but
the flowers and trees and the birds and bees, nobody would give a rat's ass about The
Blue Banner. No one would ever bother picking it up off the rack. That's why we have
to publish what we do.
If you don't believe this, all you have to do is look at the letters to the editor page and
see how many responses we get from YOU the readers. We would not be getting that
feedback if we published "happy, feel good articles."
Our stance is justifiable by the evidence that in America, people love controversy.
This should be no surprise. After all, this country was built and founded on contro
versy and run by controversial figures. So why should this same love and hunger for
controversy be immune to a college campus?
We, the staff at The Blue Banner, also know about past threats to strip The Blue Banner
of its funding so other organizations can create a UNCA newspaper full of "happy
articles." But we hope that will never happen because we are the people year-in and
year-out that everybody loves to hate. And if you get rid of us, then there will be no
one left to constantly argue with and hate.
So while we admit to helping reaffirm your beliefs that UNCA can't live with The Blue
Banner by publishing what we do every week, this editorial serves as a strong re
minder that UNCA can't live without us either.
Campus mission, minority
statistics misrepresented
loiiif
UNCA
As members of the Office of Ad
missions, we are, in large part, con
sidered “responsible” for each year’s
incoming freshman class.
As such, we were surprised, dis
heartened and truly angered by the
recent headline, “Minority statis
tics do not reflect campus mission,”
by Elizabeth Moe.
Rarely has such a clear lack of
journalistic integrity seared the front
page of The Blue Banner. Construc
tive criticism is one thing, complete
misrepresentation of facts is yet
another.
A complete retraction of last week’s
story is certainly in order, as is an
apology for the disservice done to
the university. Let us explain.
Moe began her article claiming,
“Statistics show a decrease in cul
tural diversity at UNCA from 1995
until 2002.”
In fact, the exact opposite is true,
according to the same source cited
last week. Cultural diversity at
UNCA has increased from 8.3 per
cent in 1995 to 9.4 percent in 2001.
In addition, UNCA does not rank
as poorly amongst our peers as it
seemed.
This is only the beginning of an
article so completely devoid of hon
est statistics and information as to
be considered disgraceful.
UNCA’s mission states: “Small
by choice, the university brings to
gether faculty and students of di
verse cultural and geographical
backgrounds to interact closely in a
supportive community oflearning. ”
This is not “black” and “white.” It
IS far more encompassing: in-state
and out-of-state; U.S. citizen, resi
dent alien, and international; rural
and urban; African-American, Asian
American, Hispanic, Native Ameri
can, Indian, mixed race, white, and
others; southern Appalachia and
coastal Carolina; heterosexual, gay,
lesbian, bi-sexual, and
transgendered; Jewish, Catholic,
Baptist, Buddhist, United Meth
odist, pagan; socioeconomic — we
think you get the picture.
We will not argue that the atmo
sphere on campus is not conducive
to keeping black students through
graduation.
A lack of consensus regarding di
versity on campus is at the root of
the problems.
Until the entire campus takes the
mission stated above to heart, we
will continue to go nowhere.
Recruiting only black students will
not help us satisfy our mission, nor
will it help satisfy the “Commit
ment to Equal Opportunity” we
are supposed to support.
This commitment states “UNCA
is open to people of all races and
actively seeks to promote contin
ued racial integration by recruiting
and enrolling a diverse student
body. As a liberal arts institution, it
is important that we create a learn
ing community that reflects the
diversity and multiculturalism of
our changing world.”
Even if you only consider race as a
factor of cultural diversity, the true
facts indicate UNCA has increased
diversity.
Somanna Muthana was correct
when he said, “I’m actually very
surprised about that (alleged de
crease in minority numbers). I
thought there had been a slight
increase since I got here.”
To indicate to the students, fac
ulty, and staff that the situation is
otherwise only further intensifies
the challenge of the Office of Ad
missions and the university as a
whole to bring in a diverse class.
Reference is made throughout the
article to recruitment efforts, or
lack of, by the Admissions Office.
Surprisingly, neither Moe nor any
BannerstsSf member contacted our
office to find out exactly what goes
on in the world of recruitment.
They would have learned that the
Admissions Office has done far
more minority recruitment this year
than ever before.
They would have discovered we
scheduled four separate receptions
for individual minority groups:
African-American, Asian American,
Latin American, and Native Ameri
can — specifically Cherokee.
They would have learned mem
bers of our office staff and students
spend many late nights each semes
ter calling prospective and accepted
minority students and their fami
lies to encourage them to apply,
deposit and enroll.
They would have also learned the
amount of time and energy devoted
to visiting every college fair and
nearly every individual high school
within North Carolina (not to men
tion the out-of-state efforts and out
reach programs such as Asheville
To Asheville, Camp College and
others).
We believe this would satisfy Matt
Witbrodt’s expectation to “go out
there, you get your name out, and
at least try to recruit people.” Be
lieve us, we do.
They would have also discovered
that the Office of Admissions is
truly committed to the Mission and
Commitment to Equal Opportu
nity as outlined above.
Perhaps many on campus ought
to expand their concept of diversity
from “black” and “white” to the
broader definition the university
officially embraces.
We will not argue the campus is
not entirely welcoming to minority
students. The Blue Banner’s article
makes it only too clear.
If administration officials, faculty,
staff and students are as clearly mis
informed about the true facts as this
article implies, how can we be wel
coming?
If this campus as a whole does not
proactively create a positive envi
ronment and supply positive men
tor relationships between minority
faculty/staffand students, how can
we expect to keep students here
through graduation, not to men
tion encouraging organizations and
activities to address their interests?
The university must look inter
nally at its concepts and definition
of diversity and truly commit itself
before we can be expected to bring
in a class that represents our mis
sion.
Office of Admissions Staff: Rebecca
Barraclough — Class of ‘96; Fran
Barrett; fonathan Byers — Class of
'98; Judy Carver; Rita Martin —
Class of'00; India McHale — Class of
'00; Leigh McBride — Class of‘71.
Enough of coverage of the Enron scandal
Craig Lovelace
Columnist
I’m sick and tired of hearing about
Enron - almost as much as I am
with hearing the name used as a
verb (are you listening, Tom
Daschle?).
The gist of the matter is,
Whitewater accounting practices
came back to bite the company’s
butt, and company investment val
ues got creamed.
Next thing we know. Congress is
having hearings and making
speeches, which is their answer to
everything. As long as they get their
television time, they’re happy. The
spookiest part of this whole thing is
that the more astute observers seem
to be gushing over the amount of
effort being put into this dog and
pony show.
First off, the accusations of cor
ruption flying every which way are
funny. Attorney General John
Ashcroft rescused himself from any
investigation because of contribu
tions to a failed campaign, and im
mediately became a target for op
portunists of the “kick the man
when he’s down, he’s easier to reach
that way” school of politics. Of
course, the squeaky wheels in this
case, most notably Joe Lieberman,
have also taken comparable sums
more recently. Self-righteousness
means never having to say you’re
sorry.
Now for the truly terrifying part -
people, both in real life and on TV
(there’s a difference), have actually
encouraged the investigation hear
ings. Ignoring the massive political
gain that comes out of appearing
on TV in any form, congressional
hearings are about as effective in
their fact-finding mission as ge
neric brand condoms are for birth
control.
With no rules of evidence or abil
ity to execute judgment, the hear
ings are merely an attempt to cater
to public opinion. If any change
comes out of this, it’ll be a change
from inside, much like with enter
tainment content. After all, three
months of organized crime hear
ings only determined that we have
organized crime - not exactly a shat
tering revelation.
We also have the media going into
another human-interest frenzy. All
I hear are those poor employees
who lost their life savings. Folks, if
you invest, be prepared to lose it. In
the market, there is no sure thing,
and the gambler’s golden rule ap
plies; don’t front more than you
can afford to lose.
The only thing this has done for
me is convince me that psychosis is
more common than we thought.
Nobody seems to remember Cliff
Baxter, the Enron executive who
apparently took the home suicide
course.
Nobody knew where he’d been
shot, when he’d been shot, or where
the gun was, but they knew it was a
suicide immediately. After all, the
medical examiner knew it before
having viewed the body. It’s more
important we remember the funny
picture of Kenneth Lay with a Santa
Clause costume on - now that’s
news.
The major beneficiary of this farce
seems to be the Democratic Party
leadership, who’ve gotten a new
mindless phrase - corruption! Ad
mittedly, Fritz Hollings and John
McCain claim to have invented the
concept, but it’s seen more use in
the Donkey camp lately than a copy
of “Mein Kampf’ at a David Duke
support rally.
Instead of a reelection slogan for a
few choice hypocrites, now it fits
into the plan - where they throw
accusations against the wall to see
what sticks. Despite a total lack of
evidence, the Bush administration
is being crucified - a sacrifice on the
altar of partisanship.
This cavalcade of confusion has
now resulted in the passage of Shays-
Meehan, the so-called “Campaign
Finance Reform” bill. In reality,
this will be remembered as the In
cumbent Protection Act.
It espouses to end soft money,
lever out the influence of special
interests and make you taller and
better looking. Just kidding - there’s
no provisions to get rid of special
In reality, this bill will only make
it more difficult for challengers to
get their message out.
Groups with a vested interest in
election issues will be gagged for
two to three months before an elec
tion, and your constitutional rights
to free speech are being trampled
by the white horses of these Lone
Rangers.
If the bill is so urgent and the crisis
so dire that our House reps had to
call a floor vote at 3 a.m., why
doesn’t it take effect before the
midterm elections? That disturbs
me, as does having to depend on a
slightly manic-depressive Supreme
Court to protect my rights.
The reason we have three branches
of government is so two can do the
mudhole stomp on the third for
doing something so monumentally
stupid in the first place.
This bill has gotten support only
so everyone in Congress can claim
they tried to clean up politics. Un
fortunately, the only way to do this
is to eliminate the weak link - the
people.
I can’t wait for my next trip to
Washington. It’ll be nice to go the
Capitol and have Erich von
Stroheim tell me to wipe my feet.
'The Chaos
Game and
Fractal Images,"
a lecture by Dr.
Robert L
Deuaney of Bos
ton University.
TODAY, April 4.
7p.m. Humani
ties Lecture Hall.
dinner Uime
BA Exhibition of Func
tional Ceramics by
Margaret Goodson
April 12-24, 2002
Opening Reception Friday
April 12 6:30'8:30p.m.
2nd Floor Gallery
Owen Hall