i:
1
b
' Pige 2
v
; Opinions ct the Daily Tar Heel are expressed in its
columns, covering a wide range of views, reflect the
their authors. ' '
"A Year
- .
hat We Have Learrie
Second of Three Parts
Yesterday we examined briefly the
motivations- and attitudes which bring
individuals to the editorship of The
Daily Tar Heel, concluding that out of
the , routine duties associated with the
post -come the experiences which con
tribute to the growth, maturity and
understanding of those who hold the
Job, Now we turn to glance backward
rover some of our experiences of the
past twelve .months, in an attempt to
assess, jspme of .the most important in
terms of what we have learned.
v '
When we assumed this post a year
.ago,, we. attempted to make clear our
; intention to dedicate The Daily Tar
Heel to" the dual purposes of leadership
and service. ; The extent to which we
have succeeded in that intention is for
yoii (alone. to judge:
Naturally,- we .have attempted con
stantly tb assess our own performance
as the v year has progressed, and our
most consistent barometer has been the
feedback" of student opinion. Now, as
we attempt to balance the ledger of
mutual understanding for our term, we
are extremely gratified to find a sig
nificant sum of public response on the
credit side.
This is not to say that we have been
continually successful or right or well
received; we haven't, and for that we
are also grateful. Many times our read
ers have pointed out our errors or dem
onstrated their displeasure with pur
.point of view, so that in the end both
the paper and the student body have
profited from an exchange of ideas and
opinions. Needless So say, we too have
gained-much from this-interchange, and
if pur horiozns 'are wider and our opin
ions .more flexible today than a year
agOi'much of the thanks must go to
those who saw fit to object and criticize.
'''-.': .' ''. ' , .'. - . " - .
- " ' . . "
In evaluating the response of the Uni
versity community, to our efforts, cer
tain key issues naturally come to mind.
Our-thoughts' return, for example,- to
the controversial 'student poll' which
was on - again, off - again for a period
of two weeks last: spring. The student
body wanted a poll; we felt they should
have it. But in the end, the majority
took a giant step toward learning to
live with defeat when the Constitutional
Council said "no."
in the opening days of this academic
year, the student body1 made our hearts
warmer when 5,000 turned, out for a pep
rally; which we co-sponsored with Stu
dent Government, arid all of us learned
a little more about what the "Carolina
spirit' really is.
. . . v -. . - '.
' Shortly thereafter, one of the most
disappointing chapters in the year's
chronicle occurred when we discovered
that Negro students were the victims
of flagrant discrimination in housing as
signments. With the aid of Student Gov-
ernment, and with your support, the dis
criminatory policy was struck down,
and we. all learned a little about justice.
Our next venture out on a limb was
. to : endorse Dan Moore and Lyndon
Johnson, decision which seemed to
"rate general understanding and approv
al. We then fought in favor of NSA,
and it was gratifying indeed to find that
a majority of our fellow students agreed
with us that our NSA affiliation should
not be the victim of prejudice, lies and
hatred.
By the time the "James Gardner in
cident" exploded into the headlines,
7Z Years of Editorial
Dsccad Class postage paid at tise pest c2ee ta
dupel nni. N. C CilscripUoa relts: ttJ3 per
rsaester: $3 per year. Printed fcy tie CSmpel
Cia rcfcUsiiag Co., Inc. The As&cteted Press
la e2ed ezx&xsifelj to Use use for reptile,
tion cl jt3 Uxsl aev? gxiaiM la this newspaper
er veil c a AP cew c&patcbes.. .
Editorial
In Retrospect:
our editorial policy concerning this Uni
versity was clear: we would protect it
against every threat which seemed cap
able of undermining its foundations of
responsible inquiry, progressive leader
ship for the state, and service. In retro
spect, it may seem that we were unduly
harsh with Mr. Gardner; but as one who
chose to personify certain circum
stances which we felt to be irresponsi
ble and potentially damaging to the
University including unfounded ac
cusation and unrestrained public pro
test Mr. Gardner made himself the
focal point of an entire University's concern.
Time has not dimmed our initial judg
ment that Mr. Gardner's "protest" was
unwarranted and ill - conceived. Yet
there is one outgrowth of his and his
supporters' actions that deserves men
tion; namely, the Free Speech Forum.
We have long believed that this en
tire University is a type of "forum" for
free speech, and Mr. Gardner's abor
tive rally proved as much. Yet it is
clear that for many students this free
dom is uninvested capital which draws
no interest in an intellectual bank. Aside
from the vocal leadership of the stu
dent body, there is little constant evi
dence of the existence of this University-wide
forum, and the majority voice
is heard only when its rights are threat
ened, its pocketbooks touched or its bi
ological urges aroused.
Intellectual growth demands more
than that one simply stand up for his
beliefs when the chips are down; those
beliefs must be constantly discussed
and appraised if they are; to be worth
defending in the ultimate crisis. So long
as the beliefs of the majority lie dorm
ant without assertion, apathetic has
more than a touch of validity as a de
scriptive term for many students on
this campus.
A Free Speech Forum as a regularly
scheduled series of discussion is super
fluous on this . campus, for the oppor
tunity to speak is constant. What is
heeded is a new motivation on the part
of the "Carolina gentleman." and the
"typical Carolina coed" to exercise
their mental faculties more often, rath
er than putting the task off on Student
Government and other leaders.
Freedom
Friday, April 9, 1965
Page
eaxortcus. ieiivrs ui
personal opinions of
i
HI
I
d
By watching the "James Gardner in
cident," then, perhaps we all learned
how NOT to stage a responsible protest
and how important it is for everyone
to make himself heard.
Finally, we appreciate your collective
decision to hear us out in the matter
of next year's Daily Tar Heel. We sup
ported Ernie McCrary because we knew
he was the most qualified and interested
candidate, not because we were certain
that he would continue our editorial pol
icies or try to imitate us. Under his
guidance, the paper will certainly
change, as indeed it should. The per
sonality of the editor is reflected
throughout the pages of each edition,
and we neither expect nor encourage
Ernie to follow our example in every
instance.
The confidence placed in Ernie and in
us by his election is perhaps the most
pleasing aspect of our year. For every
outgoing editor has no greater concern
than that the temperamental will of the
people provide a capable and strong
leader for the coming year.
In summary, there are many other
issues of the past year which merit dis
cussion. One of these, the Speaker Ban,
will be our primary topic tomorrow. As
for the others, perhaps they will be lost
in the void of time; perhaps they will
be aroused for future debate; perhaps
the shifting fortunes of history will
bring them to some ultimate climax.
Whatever their fate, they are the testi
mony to our passage through this in
stitution and this era, and we have
found it challenging to deal with each
of them.
Thank you for your attention and your
support. ;
i -
' .Tiff, if, i; :: -vigiu
I-
.Letters
Elections Board
Has A Defender
Editors, The Tar Heel:
During all the furor and
!haos of elections night, i con
gratulations were given toVnany
for a job well done, but few
remembered to give credit to
Bill Schmidt, chairman of the
Elections Board. .Without his
.tireless efforts much of the
work which went into campus
elections would never have been
done. It certainly is a shame
that when the March 30, 1965
editorial gave public thanks to
Bill, it did it in such a grudge
ing and half - hearted manner.
It now appears that there are
many "Carolina Coeds and Gen
tlemen" who are of the opinion -that
the Elections Board acted
in a cautionless, irresponsible,
and careless manner. Perhaps
the job performed by the Board
was not perfect, but is anyone?.
One must, realize . that there
were only 15 of us to handle
a campus - wide election with
many thousand ballots.
If our fellow students would
stop mud - slinging and devote
a little time to improving our
elections system, perhaps their
"valuable" efforts might pre
vent this so - called "mishandl
ing" of campus elections from
ever occurring agin
A Barbara Bell
Elections Board,
1964-65
200 C Nurses Dorm
Moore Refuses
To Take Stand
Editors, The Tar Heel:
Governor Dan Moore's com
ments to the N. C. Editorial
Writers Conference this past.
Friday deserve rebuttal.
In believing it unwise on the
part of the University to advo
cate repeal of the Speaker Ban
Law, Moore said: "I believe if
you put that thing up to a pop
ular vote today ... it would
be overwhelmingly the law.!
The fact that the majority of the
people might be for the Speak
er Ban is probably what deters
Moore from urging repeaL
It is most likely that private
ly he is against it and if he
were a student here today he
would probably fell ifce most
of us. However,; Moore seems
frightened by the idea of op
posing a majority will.
Great leaders stand up for
their principles whether they are
in the majority or minority. Ob
viously Gov. Moore is not . a
peat leader, or does not care
ffaSd1? i0T his liefs, or
'Andior Gov- Moore to be
Le thought that openly
porting President Johnson
uSLhf t 1iability because he
.thought Johns0n was not going
"Right Of Way"
- . ' 1 1. ' llUq. -1.1. 1 J , II ,,,,
... -- J- ..'Xv;.:-;';v:
' " 7 ' 'v y
i. ' " " ' '"J , -
is v
t - '
iiillllll
Knock
to do too well. It was quite
amusing and heartening
to have President Johnson and
Lt. Gov. Scott (both far more
progressive than Moore) outpoll
him. So I doubt sometimes if
Gov. Moore can accurately feel
the pulse of the people of North
Carolina.
Another dandy, idea of, Moore
is to be cautious wait AT
LEAST another two years for
a higher education bond issue.
He prefers waiting because the
highway bond issue is coming up
for a vote. No one will dispute
the validity of the highway bond
issue, but the need for money
for higher education is RIGHT
NOW, not sometime in . the dis
tant future.
Highways can be. built any
time, but .it is very difficult to
get someone to. go to .school
when they are 25 because they
were denied the opportunity at ,
18 due to lack of state funds.
I thought that education was
the number one priority of the
. Moore Administration- Appar
ently by the way Moore speaks,
and the way the State legisla
ture cuts down educational ap
propriations, somebody is mak
ing a lot of hollow promises.
.It is a shame that North Ca
rolina will have to wait until
January, 1969, when hopefully
Robert Scott will move into the
Governor's Mansion, to have a
governor committed to pro
gress like Luther Hodges and
Terry Sanford were.
It's going to be a long wait.
Robert Farb
318 Teague
SL Re-Election
Is Called Unjust
Editors, The Tar Heel:
As the returns from the con
troversial election in MD II
were tallied, the worst fears of
most persons involved were ver
ified: a duly elected candidate
in the regular election was den
ied a legislative seat as a re
sult of a re - vote ordered by
a ridiculously naive interpreta
tion of the election laws.
Lanny Shuff, presently co -chairman
of the campus Affairs
Committee and a legislator'
with two years experience, fin
ished a "safe" third (out of
eight) in the March 23 general
election for the four seats.
Now, two weeks later, Shuff
. finds himself an outsider to Stu
dent Legislature, certainly a
heartbreaking setback to a
hard - working and dedicated
SG man. Before the blame for
this judicial blunder can be de
termined, it is necessary to
give a brief resume of the cir
cumstances. On March 23 it appeared that
Jim Brame, Hugh Blackwell
and Shuff had won three of the
four seats by comfortable mar
gins over the Other five candi
dates. There was a tight race
for the remaining seat, howev
er as Phil Kirstein, Steve
Hockfield, and Craig Wardlow
were separated by a total of
.
W f . - i
'- ; ' i
t. V , . ;
-: - ; ' - . 1
$ f - : .Md
' ' f ' ' - .Min.Mgipq
- J- it 3T '-'
fg " - - iZ ' - ' - '
, 'v '.-.- 1 " . -H- :
" ' "- "-
1
3
only four votes.
As a result, the election was
contested by Kirstein, and the
re - count the next day. merely
added to the confusion of the
Election Board. Not only, was
there a miscount, but in addi
tion it was discovered that ten
ballots hacibeen forged.
Kirstein found himself the
. pround possessor of ten addi
tional votes marked on the "bul
let ballots" of another candi
date in a different color
ink! Our stealthy night visitor
did not even take the trouble
to be subtle! Kirstein was absol
ved of all blame, but the contest
for the fourth seat was still un
settled. Chaos obviously reigned and
it was understandable that .the
Elections Board should call for
a re - election. But here lies
the nib. .
T h e Constitutional Council
construed the election laws (Ar
ticle IV, Section 2) to call for a
re - election with all original
candidates included, even the
top three who had earlier ac
hieved clear pluralities. On
what possible grounds could
the Council base its actions?
This body took advantage of
the loosely worded election laws
to turn the democratic process
into a judicial farce. There is
ho clear thread of logic in this
decision to include the appar
ent "winners".
It was a grave injustice to
Brame, Blackwell and Shuff,
who were now forced to contin
ue their campaigns for seats to
which they were rightfully en
titled. In Snuff's case all his
CJimpaigriing was to no avail.
Now, two weeks later, Shuffs
election is reversed. Is this
the will of the 142 people , who
voted for him on March 23? Is
it the wish of the electorate
that Wardlow, who finished fifth
originally with 132 votes, should
lead all candidates the second
time around with a meager 79
votes?
With whom should the respon
sibility for this situation lie? Ob
viously, the ultimate blame
falls on the mysterious night
visitor who took it upon him
self to insure his candidate's
election. But this is avoiding
the question, since once the
deed was done, its aftereffects
were handled in a particularly
. amateur fashion.
The Elections Board exhibit
ed a masterful lack of concern
for the protection of the ballot
boxes on the night of the elec
tion. The General Election Laws
also need to be re - written, or
at least drastically devised to
delete vague clauses.
But even the haziness of the
regulations cannot excuse the il
logical decision handed down by
the Constitutional CounciL
Given this unfortunate situa
tion, partial blame must rest
with the Daily Tar Heel for the
absence of the necessary cover
age of the re - election. Less
than half as many voters turned
out on April 6 to re - vote. The
lack of sufficient publicity must
be the major explanation for
the poor voter participation.
Noting the sweeping changes in
Playboy Interview
Disgrace
By ART BUCIHVALD
The New York Herald Tribune
I was interviewed in Play
boy this month and it's amaz
ing bow many people re3d it.
You think Playboy only appeals
to college boys and traveling
salesmen, but it's just not so.
The day after the article ap
peared, I came home and my
wife WPS waiting. "Your inter
view is in Playboy."
"Who told you?" I asked.
"Joan Conway."
"What's she doing reading
Playboy?
"That's not the point. Joel had
the magazine and he was show
ing it to all his friends at
school when the teacher caught
him. It was bad enough to have
the magazine, but when he said
the reason he had it was be
cause his father was in it, the
teacher didn't know what to do."
"It's not my fault," I pro
tested. The phone rang and my wife
answered it "Yes, I know, Ma
rion. Joan called me about it.
No, I didn't see the other pic
tures. Thanks for calling."
"Marion Dalinsky saw it,
too ,lshe said.
The phone rang again 'Hello,
Mary. I can't talk now. He's
home. I don't know what Im
going to do about it. I'll call
you later."
"Mary Lindsay has a copy,"
she said.
"Boy, Playboy has an inter
esting readership," I muttered.
My son came running in. "Vic
kie won't give me back my
Playboy," he cried.
Really Shocked .
Vickie' is our cook. She came
in a moment later. "My good
ness, Mr. Buchwald, my friends
are really shocked. They never
thought I'd work for anyone
whose picture would appear in
Playboy."
. "What's wrong with the pic
Ti
nor
9
candidate position after the se
cond ballot, one wonders if these
"final" results are truly repre
sentative. Thus, in MD II, the re - vote
degenerated into a struggle be
tween fraternity factions to stuff
the ballot boxes with "bullet"
votes.
Violations handled in. such a .
haphazard manner . can o n 1
have the effect of encouraging
and propagating election irre
gularities: Any dissatisfied in
dividual might subvert the will
of the majority. This is an un
fortunate situation, but the im
plications are clear.
Reform is mandatory. One
casuality is Lanny Shuff, the
loser through circumstances be
yond his control.
But . there is another victim:
the entire student body.
-
Trip MacPherson
431 Ehringhaus
UNC Psychologist
Replies On Tests
Editors, The Tar Heel:
It is unclear as to whether
David Rothman's article on psy
chological testing is meant as
an impartial, stimulating bit of
fact - collection, or as the dis
covery of one more creeper on
the socialism plant.
It does seem that Rothman
favors Rep. Gallagher's por
trayal of psychological testing
as an "insidious and illegal
serach of the human mind."
But in any event, as the recent
discussion of an article in the
Tar Heel on Rev. Reeb's life
and death has amply shown, the
inferences drawn from the most
obvious writing may be in er
ror. Especially when the facts
are not in.
In fact, the Minnesota Multi
phasic Personality Inventory
(MMPI) has been, given not for
one but for about six years (how
about that for sneakiness!). It
used to be given to Psychology
26 students br - annually.
The purpose of its use is not
to ''uncover" homosexuals and
atheists (There are easier ways
to do this at Carolina), but to
aid in reserach on this test that
will have a wide range of possi
bilities for aiding," not raiding,
the human mind.
These test results are treated
with anonymity. No one checks
to see whether a particular per
son answers a particular ques
tion in a particular way.
The psychological researcher
may check out hypotheses about
particular items on groaps of
people. More often he looks at
whole collections of items (by
items I mean particular state
ments in the test that may be
answered True, False, or I do
not know) in an attempt to find
ways to predict the behavior of
some person who might take the
test in the fntare.
What does the research psy
chologist want to know? In gen
eral, he wants to know things
about people that these people
do no directly state when they
To Ar
0
If
6
ture? I've got all my clotfses
on
"But nobody else has," Vic
kie replied.
The phone range again. ?;
was Polly Kraft, who happoa
ed to pick up the magazine m
the drugstore, etc.
My wife said she'd
ill b r
back.
"I don't see why evensna
should be so shook up becas?
I haopened to be in Playboy."
"It's a cool magazia?," my
son said.
"There's your answer,' nr4y
wife said. "How C3n I keep b..r.
in line when you're posing with
a bunch of nude girls?"
"I wasn't posing wifii nnjc
girls. I was in the front of tho
book and they were in the back.
My article doesn't touch the
Playmate of the Month' even
when you fold it way out
"You probably were there
when they took the pictures of
the 'Playmate.' "
"I wasn't anywhere near
when they took that picture."
This time when the pihir.e
rang I answered it. It was aiy
mother - in - law. When she
heard my voice, she shouted,
"Lecher!"
"I'm not a lecher!" I shctte-i
back.
"Sex fiend!"
"Mom, will you calm duwn
and say what's on your mind?"
"Tell my daughter I have
room for her and the children."
"That's nice," I said.
"The town's in a state of
shock," she cried. "You can't
get a copy of the magazir.e
anywhere. I bought the last five
copies they had."
"I'll send the famliy in the
morning."
c "What are j'ou goicg to 5o?H
she demanded.
"I'm moving in with five bia
nies. Playboy takes cars of
its own."
on
I
answer single items on this test.
As often as not he is interested
in problems that are not di
rectly associated with college cr
college - age people.
On the other hand he may be
very concerned with the possi
bility of detecting people who
are likely to have emotional dit
ficulties - requiring .iroatment
(work in this line is well under
way). How many of us wish we
would have known ahead of time
that a firend or acquaintance
was going to "go off the deep
end?"
The researcher may be at
tempting to isolate the person
ality characteristics of under
graduates who do better or poor
er than expected on the basis
of college boards, in order to
help counsel high school stud
ents on whether or not to go
to college, or on what college
to attend (there are already
some reliable findings on this
problem).
He may be interested in pro
blems less related to practical
application (for instance, what
personality characteris
tics change most on this test),
or to "way - out" practical ap
plications (there is a scale thst
will make a good professiocal
baseball player!).
The important point is the use
to which such findings are put.
It would be ludicrous for the
Giants to turn down a prospect
who has been hitting .350 in the
minors, or to fire Willie Mays,
because either of them did not
do well enough on the test. It
would be equally ludicrous to
turn down a high school valedic
torian because his MMPI score
wasn't what one might expect.
Test results of this sort are in
tended to supplement other
more direct indices of a per
son's behavior. They are
meant to help allay or preclude
difficulties, or to help direct peo
ple to fulfill their potentials as
human beings. In order to do so,
items relating to many facts of
human experience religion
sex, work preference, feelings
of anxiety, etc.) must be used.
There is absolutely no judg
mental factor in their use. No
implicit preferences for certain
kinds of people are acted on
when the MMPI is examined.
Essential to this use as sup
plementary tool is the idea that
such a test is used to predict
behavior. Should it be used as
a screening device, it will do
so in proportion as the empiri
cal findings ' substantiate its u-e
in this manner. Then it may
be possible, in the college set
ting, to anticipate a student's
behavior with the purpose of
helping him, his fello'w students
and the university.
It seems to me that N. C.
State recently would have or.e
well to have had a way of an
ticipating or more quickly de
tecting the pyromaniac who lev
elled a part of their campus. It
is conceivable that the MMPI,
or a similar instrument, ir.ay
be found useful in detectin
f fs.t
such people.
o t
Peter David Krone
Dept. cf Psychology