Commentary
1 HE 1 AR HEEL
Gin i Lynch, Associate Editor
Joel Broadway, Sports Editor
Jeff Hiday, Editor
Bill Reidy, News Editor
Lisbeth Levine, Arts 9 Features Editor
Jeff Neuvuae, Photography Editor
Staff: Margaret Bell, Scott Bower, Jeff Brody, Mary Clifford, Mark Cole, Bill Edwards, Pete
Felkner, CB Gaines, Gwen Hailey, April Hardison, Andy Hodges, Kathy Hopper, Marlynn Ruth
Jones, Joel Katzenstein, Eileen McCann, Tom McNeil, Haleh Moddasser, Gregory Noble, Ben
Perkowski. Cassandra Poteat, Bill Rose, Bill Shaw, Jodi Smith, Lori Thomas, Mike TooletD.A.
Trevor, Melanie Wells, Darryl Wiluams, Edith Wooten, Rebekah Wright. Advertising: Paula
Brewer, manager, Mike Tabor, coordinator, Terry Lee, representative. Business: Anne Sink, interim
manager. SecretaryReceptionist: Kim Baker, Composition: UNC Printing and Duplicating Depart
ment. Printing: Hinton Press, Mebane.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Cole
to act onlv as student
r ... , .
inanyconcert
litigation
fhinkabduti
There's every reason in the world for North Carolinians to be relieved that
the five-month-old anti-drunken driving bill finally became law last week. No
more DUI newspaper articles and editorials, television newscasts or radio
broadcasts. Even the Raleigh rhetoric and political lobbying are destined to
slacken. It was a long, tough battle for Gov. Hunt's Safe Roads Act, sup
posedly the toughest law in the nation.
But despite the drudgery, it was precisely that five-month period of politi
cal maneuvering and scrimmaging that had as much, if not more, impact on
driving than any law could. The media coverage of the legislative contest may
have been drudgery to readers, but it focused attention on drinking and driv
ing. And it led to some changes, perhaps subliminal, in the public attitude
toward drunken driving.
It is easy, and fair, to praise Hunt's successful drunken driving campaign.
That's nice, we say, nodding our heads in agreement with Hunt's idealism.
But, just as when a family member or close friend dies and you say "I never
thought it'd happen to me," everyone is prone to accept and praise the
legislation, pushing aside reality. The specter of an accident occurring to you
or someone you know is very real check your local newspaper for details.
Sure it's real, but we students don't need to depress ourselves with such
thoughts, we say.
; Just in case none of this excites you, consider some of the tougher aspects
of Hunt's single driving-while-impaired charge. For instance, if you drank a
beer, just one, and drove afterwards, you could be arrested under the new
DWI bill. Furthermore, the incident likely would cost you at least $1,000
that's the minimum amount lawyers are being recommended to handle such a
case, regardless of guilt or innocence.
'60 Minutes' soap opera
The verdict is out. A civil jury voted 10-2 Monday that CBS, 60 Minutes
and Dan Rather did not slander a California doctor who sued them for $30
million over a 1979 report linking the doctor to an insurance fraud scheme.
But the defendant, Rather, confident and cocky at first, was visibly tense
as the trial went on. The credibility of this top-rated show and its former host
was on the line; the tables were turned by the plaintiff who put the spotlight
on Dan Rather. While it seems that 60 Minutes is legitimately off the hook
this time, some questions remain concerning the ethics of investigative report
ing and the tactics used by the series in filming its sows. Just how far should
one go to get at the "truth" and what means should be used to obtain it?
Regardless of Galloway's guilt, some of CBS' reporting techniques could be
described as unethical. Would CBS have been acquitted if the plaintiff him
self was truly guiltless? ; j ,
Plaintiff Dr. Carl A. Galloway likened his plight to " David up against
Goliath." The same may ring true for the media's eager coverage of this
event as CBS claims that this case has been blown out of proportion, especi
ally by the other networks (NBC and ABC). Still, the verdict of the trial did
show that 60 Minutes did not have disregard for the truth and is committed
to the practice of investigative journalism. Most of all, this case served to il
lustrate that no one, least of all journalists, is above the law or public
scrutiny. " ; r . ";
To the editor:
Concerning your story "Student may file
suit; Claims '83 concert was mismanaged,"
June 2) and editorial ("Stormy weather,"
June 2) dealing with my allegations against the
Carolina Concert for Children Committee: It
was not my intention to go public at that time,
but since someone had leaked information
concerning my inclination toward litigation
against the committee, I thought it best to per
sonally state my position so as to avoid any
misunderstandings. To my dismay, I find that
many people have misconstrued the relevant
facts. -:':---r
I am not looking into suing Ben Lee for
fraudulence. Any claim I make will most prob
ably rest upon what I feel was a breach of his
fiduciary duty as a trustee of $103,000 of stu
dent funds. The facts are clear. In order to re
ceive approval for an extension of the deadline
for signing a headline act, Lee told the Cam
pus Governing Council that he would pur
chase rain insurance no later than April 15,
eight days before the concert. He said that
there was no way that we could lose any money
other than the cost of the insurance policy,
since if it was sunny, the concert would make a
profit, (which was to be turned over to the
charities involved).
Since it did rain on the date of the concert,
our policy would have been in effect; we
would have lost not $70,000, but about
$10,000, which would have been the cost of
the policy. Having failed to protect our funds
with insurance, Lee made no effort to procure
an alternate indoor site such as Carmichael
Auditorium. Carmichael could have accom-.
modated up to 8,000 patrons.
The tickets Lee ordered were totally inade
quate. There were no audit stubs to facilitate
accounting for sales. As a result of this over
sight, coupled with inadequate control proce
dures, a large number of tickets remain unao
counted for. Worse yet, the incorrect time ap
peared on the tickets, and some of the tickets
were actually sold before this error was cor
rected. As a result, we received complaints
from some who came to Chapel Hill but missed ,
the conceit. We were able to refund the money
for their tickets, but what of their wasted trips,
time and gasoline? Is this the image that we
wish Carolina to project?
Let me make it clear that in any litigation I
act as a fee-paying student. I am not suing as a
member of CGC, nor am I suing CGC. Any
monetary settlement would go to student gov-'
eminent coffers, to replenish a fund that was
needlessly and foolishly depleted. At the very
least, I hope that my actions will prod those
persons entrusted with student funds to take
their duty more seriously than they have in the
past. Someone may be watching.
Rebel A. Cole
SCGC Student Affairs Chairman
Letters?
The Tar Heef welcomes letters to the
editor and contributions of columns for the
editorial page.
Such contributions should be typed, triple
spaced, on a 60-space line, and are subject
to editing. Contributions must be submitted
by noon each Monday. ;
Column writers should' include their
majors and hometown; each letter should -include
the writer's name, address and tele
phone number. -
Jo: m n ?JLK W
4
TrartwfSnmtOTJK
HEREXlTS ALL YOUR v;.; P) f
.: Br
,. ..u..,u, . .r n i
AREPWOOP
TREE5HWEP
PERRICK
TKISQWIKIS
ALLCFTOE
HEEPSHAPAY
6GQ0 L&YuTOBUS
SwsiSAPEACEKEEPa?,..
A TBSB
IKSTREEfilVESOFr A'E POLLUTION
-THAMASTEELMIILCI VDU5SR5W4
Q5
RALEIGH WOMEN'S HEALTH
ORGANIZATION
ABORTIONS UP TO 12 WEEKS $195.00
FROM 13-14 WEEKS $300.00 15-16 WEEKS $400.00
Pregnancy Tests- Birth Control
Problem Pregnancy Counseling "
For Further Information Call 832 0535 or 1 800-221-2568
917 West Morgan St. Raleigh, N.C. 27605
BEACH WEEKEND SPECIAL
Enjoy your weekend and let us do your laundry
washdryfold regularly - 65$lb.
just- 50vIb. through June 30, 1983
Monday-Friday only
10 The Tar Heel Thursday, June 9, 1983