6The Daily Tar HeelWednesday. September 14 1983
0 lailg ar Bad
91st year of editorial freedom
Kerry DeRochi. Editor
ALISON DAVIS, Managing Editor
LISA PULLEN, University Editor
Christine Manuel, state and National Editor
MIKE DESlSTI, Sports Editor
BILL RIEDY, News Editor
JEFF HIDAY, Associate Editor
John Conway, cuy Editor
KAREN FISHER, Features Editor
Jeff Grove, Arts Editor
Charles W. Ledford, photography Editor
A unity of spirit
Raising a ruckus
Late last month, a reporter from the Raleigh News and Observer was
permitted to begin copying records showing the kinds of consulting work
done by UNC system faculty for private businesses. That didn't last long.
UNC President William C. Friday, acting on the advice of the state at
torney general's office, halted public inspection of the records. The at
torney general's office said the records are private, and that disclosure of
them could carry a criminal penalty under state law.
What has ensued is an overblown dog fight between UNC and the
N&O. And all that it has accomplished is a muddling of the original issue
whether the sought-after documents should be made public. The
N&O, upset over the fact that it might miss out on a scoop, has created its
own. For the past six days the newspaper has used its front page, the local
news section front and the editorial pages to lambast President Friday for
denying the public its right to know.
It all started when an N&O reporter followed up on a lead that in
dicated a potential conflict of interest; apparently the paper was in
vestigating the possibility that UNC system professors are consulting for
private firms and conducting research in the university paid for by those
firms at the same time. Reporters were denied the "exclusive," though,
when the records were declared private.
This flabbergasted the editors at the N&O, and shortly afterward they
let the ink flow, most of it running on President Friday, who is obviously
caught in the middle of a difficult situation. But his handling of the situa
tion has been admirable. Friday told the N&O: "All through the years
I've worked here, the attorney general has acted as the university's at
torney. There's nothing unusual or different about what we did here."
At the same time, Friday told the N&O how its reporters could obtain
the information they seek. He said he could supply the public with the
names of those professors who had been involved in consulting work,
general information about the companies employing the professor (not
including the names) and the number of times each professor had been
involved in consulting work. Raymond H. Dawson, UNC system vice
president for academic affairs, then said that the N&O could learn for
whom the faculty members at the 16 campuses worked by asking each of
them.
N.C. law defines a personnel file as "any information gathered by the
department" relating to, among other things, an employee's application,
salary and promotions. Andrew A. Vanore Jr., senior deputy attorney
general, said a faculty member's consultant status could affect promo
tion, thus committing such information to the employee's private person
nel file. Vanore's reasoning is comparable to an argument that what style
of clothing a professor wears could alter his appearance, possibly leading
to a promotion.
Vanore's own boss, Attorney General Rufus Edmisten, has hinted that
the original ruling may be overturned. He told the N&O that "when at all
possible I've always given rulings that tend toward opening up matters to
the public. And in this case if it doesn't fragrantly violate some state law,
then I'll want to open up those records." As of last night, Edmisten had
still not ruled on the matter.
Not that anyone's listening. The matter has degenerated into a brawl
between UNC and The News and Observer. Only when the dust settles
will anyone remember to check whether the documents were made
public.
Standard swindle
Eliminating waste was on the minds of Reaganomic budget cutters two
years ago when they tightened the eligibility standards for Social Security
disability benefits. They'd hoped to trim about $2 billion from the pro
gram by canceling payments to those they believed didn't really need the
money.
And since then, the new standards have saved the government some
money about $9 million last year. But much of the $9 million came
from the pockets of those who really needed the benefits. Across the na
tion, 374,000 people had their benefits canceled; 10,000 in North
Carolina.
The recipients were told they could appeal any cancellation of their
payments and in North Carolina seven of every 10 who did were suc
cessful. But the appeals process takes months, and meanwhile the reci
pients have to make do without the much-needed money. .
Last week Gov. Jim Hunt came to the rescue by ordering a mora
torium placed on removing people from the list of benefactors. Except in
cases of fraud, all disability benefits would be distributed until the reci
pient was proven able to work and no longer had need of the money.
Hunt added that even without federal backing this state would provide its
own standards, joining Arkansas, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania which
have already imposed similar moratoriums.
Hunt's actions should show disabled North Carolinians that they have
at least one less thing to worry about. And perhaps, just perhaps, the
moratoriums nationwide will show the federal government that its time to
review standards and find a way to save money that's a bit more humane
than taking it from the disabled.
By JOHN PATRICK GRACE
With the furor over the Soviet-downed KAL jetliner,
the devastating summer drought and bloodshed in Leba
non, Nicaragua and El Salvador, there is no lack of vital
issues to ponder and debate. The issue raised in Joel
Katzenstein's column ("Strides toward religious unity,"
DTH, Aug 30) about the increasing harmony between
campus religious organizations and the ensuing letters
challenging his focus on just Christian and Jewish bodies
is, however, as important a matter as any.
The greater openness and sharing among the bodies
Katzenstein singled out is not limited to UNC or Chapel
Hill. Rather, it mirrors a worldwide phenomenon that I
have seen taking shape in Europe over the past two years,
as well as elsewhere in the United States. I refer to nothing
less than the healing of theounded and divided Body of
Christ in this world. After four centuries and more of bit
ter, often murderous quarreling and infighting, Christians
of many denominations are getting caught up in a spirit of
forgiveness and reconciliation that is sweeping the planet.
At a conference in Strasbourg, France, that I attended
to celebrate Pentecost 1982, Catholics and Protestants
were actually saying things to each other like, "I'm
Catholic; will you forgive me for the divisions m the Body
of Christ?" arid, "I'm Protestant; will you forgive me?"
More and more ecumenical ministries are developing,
and people are starting to see that God is calling upon
Christians to share the truths of the faith they have re
ceived and be open to receive other truths of doctrine and
practice from fellow Christians of other traditions. This
sharing is leading to a fusion of part of the Body that had
previously been at odds with sometimes openly scorn
ful of one another.
The Daily Tar Heel
Editorial Writers: Frank Bruni, Charles Ellmaker and Kelly Simmons
Assistant Managing Editors: Joel Broadway and Michael Toole
Assistant News Editor: Melissa Moore
News: Tracy Adams, Joseph Berry hill, Ashley Blackwelder, Keith Bradsher, Lisa Brantley, J.
Bonasia, Hope Buffington, Tom Conlon, Kathie Collins, Kate Cooper, Teresa Cox, Lynn
Davis, Dennis Dowdy, Suzanne Evans, Kathy Farley, Genie French, Kim Gilley, Sherri Good
son, Marymelda Hall, Sue Kuhn, Liz Lucas, Thad Ogburn, Beth O'Kelly, Ellen Orahood,
Rosemary Osborne, Heidi Owen, Beth Ownley, Cindy Parker, Donna Pazdan, Frank Proctor,
Linda Queen, Sarah Raper, Mary Alice Resch, Cindi Ross, Katherine Schultz, Sharon
Sheridan, Deborah Simpkins, Jodi Smith, Sally Smith, Mark Stinneford, Carrie Szymeczek,
Liz Saylor, Amy Tanner, Doug Tate, Vince Trefethen, Scott Wharton, Lynda Wolf, Rebekah
Wright, Jim Zook, Kyle Marshall assistant state and national editor, and Stuart Tonkinson,
assistant university editor.
Sports: Frank Kennedy and Kurt Rosenberg, assistant sports editors. Glenna Burr ess, John
Hackney, Lonnie McCullough, Robyn Norwood, Michael Per singer, Julie Peters, Lee Roberts
and Mike Waters.
Features: Dawn Brazell, Clarice Bickford, Tom Camacho, Toni Carter, Margaret Claiborne,
Karen Cotten, Cindy Dunlevy, Charles Gibbs, Tom Grey, Kathy Hopper, Dana Jackson,
Charles Karnes, Joel Katzenstein, Diana Massie, Warren Miller, Kathy Norcross, Jane Os
ment, Clinton Weaver and Mike Truell, assistant features editor.
Arts: Steve Carr, Ivy Hilliard, Jo Ellen Meekins, Gigi Sonner and David Schmidt, assistant
arts editor.
Graphic Arts: Jamie Francis, Lori Heeman, Ryke Longest, Jeff Neuville, Zane Saunders and
Lori Thomas, photographers.
Business: Anne Fulcher, interim business manager; Dawn Welch, circulationdistribution
manager; Patti Pittman, classifieds.
Advertising: Paula Brewer, advertising manager; Mike Tabor, advertising coordinator; Laura
Austin, Melanie Eubanks, Kevin Freidhcim, Patricia Gorry, Terry Lee, Doug Robinson and
Anneli Zeck ad representatives.
Composition: UNC-CH Printing Department
Printing Hinton Press, Inc. of Mebane.
Two hundred evangelical Christians who took part in
the recent Vancouver congress of the World Council of
Churches signed a statement saying that the meeting
"challenged stereotypes some of us have had" about the
cooperative organization of Protestant, Eastern Orthodox
and Anglican churches. Their letter praised "an overarch
ing spiritual and biblical orientation" of the congress and
said "the dimension of worship was both central and spir
itually refreshing."
Those, on either side, who have followed the years of
suspicion and even hostility between evangelicals on the
one hand and those who espouse the social-action ap
proach of the World Council of Churches on the other
. . . Christians of many denomina
tions are getting caught up in a
spirit of forgiveness and recon
ciliation that is . sweeping the
planet.
will appreciate the degree of reconciliation the evangeli
cals' letter represents.
As for the Jewish link to this unity in the making, there
has of late been more and more emphasis by Christians of
many different theological persuasions on the key role of
Israel in God's plan for the world, and on the fact that by
profession of faith in Jesus the Jew who best exempli
fied the spirit of the Law (rather than the letter) gentiles
are grafted onto the vine of God's chosen people.
Saint Paul says this explicitly in telling the Christians at
Ephesus that they, as gentiles, had once been excluded
from membership among the Chosen People of Israel and
were without hope and without God. However, he goes
on to say, through the blood of Christ shed on the cross,
the barrier between the Jews and gentiles has been broken
down and the two have been made into one body and re
conciled with God.
Daniel Ange, a French priest who is very impassioned in
the cause of promoting this unity, during the Strasbourg
congress dramatically asked pardon of "my Jewish
brothers" for the way "we Christians have so disfigured
the face of Jesus (through prejudice and strife) that you
have not been able to recognize him as the Messiah."
Nonetheless whether recognized by all or not I be
lieve it is Jesus himself, risen and reigning and acting
through the power of the Holy Spirit, who is the animat
ing force of this global effort to unite believers of both the
Old and the New Covenants.
As for adherents of non-Christian and non-Jewish reli
gions and cults, agnostics, atheists and the just plain indif
ferent, no, you are not excluded from this unity move
ment. But if indeed Jesus is the catalyst of it, and if indeed
it is his spirit that is drawing people together, then it fol
lows that gaining access to the mighty assembly that is
gathering comes from acknowledging Jesus as Lord and
submitting to the direction of the Holy Spirit.
Katzenstein's omission of non-Christian and non-Jewish
campus religious groups from his article may have been
unintentional, but the omission was significant all the
same.
John Patrick Grace, a native of Chicago, is a graduate
student in Italian.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Why drag in old news?
To the editor:
Should the article titled "Three lacrosse
players arrested for assault" (DTH, Sept.
12) be interpreted as a precedent of crime
coverage by The Daily Tar HeeP. Will any
future story concerning a black, for exam
ple, also include all previous arrests of.
other blacks? Residents of Morrison
Dorm? If a person who wears glasses is
charged for a crime, will we again see a
paragraph like the one we saw Monday
noting that "the incident was not the first
involving near-sighted persons. . .?"
Dragging in a separate incident of a dif
ferent nature that happened more than
two years ago and was linked only be
cause it too involved another lacrosse
player was uncalled for. Yet in Mon
day's paper it accounts for almost half the
article.
Is this a subtle conspiracy to degrade,
with sweeping generalizations, the in
dividual members of the lacrosse team
through guilt by association? Probably
Yellow journalism
To the editor:
I have to question the logic and order of
your "expose" on lacrosse players ("Three
lacrosse players arrested for assault,"
DTH, Sept. 12). The tenuous connection
between the newsworthy item of the ar
rests Friday morning and the so-called
"background" solicited from unrelated
persons (namely, Art Chansky), leads to
confusion arid wonderment.
Why devote nearly half of the article to
a two-year-old incident which is neither
newsworthy or relevant? Sure, there is a
connection, but the "background" de
served only about one paragraph worth of
ink. The portion concerning lacrosse team
players' goings-on at Four Corners
restaurant came off mostly as a filler of
some type. Such careless treatment of
news is unexpected coming from a publi
cation as noteworthy as the DTH.
It appeared as if the DTH was making a
point about lacrosse team members' an
tics. But if a point was made, it was that
slipshod, yellow journafism is eye-catching
especially on the front page. i?
Robert G. Griffin
Chapel Hill
not. Probably closer to sloppy reporting.
All this wouldn't bother me not as
much, at least if these three players al
ready had been convicted. They've only
been charged, though; the case stands as a
civil complaint, to date based solely on the
word of a woman and a number of police
not determined by the reporter. One?
Twenty? The fart that "the police" wit
nessed the incident (the alleged incident)
provides no more comfort police are
human, too, and charges have been known
to be dropped when police later have their
cases destroyed by defense lawyers.
Perhaps the "Lacrosse Three" are guil
ty. But don't try to build the prosecution's
case; just report the charges. Who knows?
Maybe a lowly judge will drop the sentence
already imposed (or at least forecasted) by
The Daily Tar Heel.
I hear the court date is set for some time
in October. Do the trio, your readership
and the rest of the lacrosse team - a
favor, and give the accused their day in
court. Report the verdict, guilty or not.
Better yet, catch up on the verdicts of all
the other people whose arrests have been
reported in The Daily Tar Heel since
school began. Could be some innocent
people there, too.
In the meantime, tighten up the report
ing of criminal charges. That or give us
another crossword puzzle with the space.
Dean Foust
Carrboro
Let's make an effort
Only barefoot
To the editor:
On Thursday, Sept. 8, the front page
of the DTH featured a photograph of a
female student, sitting outdoors, bare
foot, reading. The caption read,
"Barefoot and..."
This phrase was clearly intended to
suggest the formula, "Keep 'em bare
foot and pregnant," by which men
have traditionally kept women "in their
place."
I personally find this caption offen
sive, and I am certain that women at
UNC find it even more so. I believe
that the DTH owes an apology to all
women at UNC, and especially to
Susan Epps, the student in the photo
graph. Allan Rubinoff
Craige
To the editor:
One of the luxuries of living in a resi
dence hall is being able to take full advan
tage of the utilities electricity and water.
At present, one of these utilities, water,
has become even more of a luxury. Chapel
Hill is in one of the driest periods in its
history. OWASA has placed mandatory
restrictions on the town of Chapel Hill to
aid in water conservation, and as members
of this community, all of us living in
residence halls should strive to do our best
in sharing this responsibility.
This is a plea to everyone who lives in a
residence hall, whether it be Morrison, Old
West or Cobb, to make a conscious effort
to save water. In doing this, you can be an
important part of the community effort to
make Chapel Hill a more comfortable
place for everyone. If we as students don't
make a voluntary effort, who's to say that
we won't be placed under uncomfortable
restrictions ourselves?'
The ways to conserve water are
numerous. When taking a shower, do not
run the water continuously. Lather up
with the water off. Limit yourself to one.
shower daily. Men should not run the
water continuously when shaving. Use dis
posable plates and cups instead of utensils
that have to be washed. Drink cold canned
drinks so as not to use ice unnecessarily.
Do these things yourself and pay atten
tion to your hallmates and suitemates. If
they are unaware of the situation, remind
them. Be a role model. When you see
posters that say "Don't be a drip," pay at
tention to them.
Mark Dalton
President
Residence Hall Association
West German worries
By ANDREA STUMPF
October. It is a month that deserves '
your attention. You probably think im
mediately of orange pumpkins, Carolina
blue and cheers, ghosts and witches, fall
ing leaves. But there is more to this Octo
ber, and it is neither for comfort nor com
placency. October promises to see blood in the
streets of West Germany. Scheduled
demonstrations, predicted by most to re
sult in public turmoil, are on the agenda.
The demonstrations in West Germany up
to this point will have been only the playful
beginning of a public show of emotion.
Unless negotiations . between the United
States and the Soviet Union in Geneva
bring concrete results soon, the tensions in
West Germany will be pushed to the point
of eruption.
Most West Germans are not optimistic
about the progress in Geneva. Already by
last summer, the majority of West Ger
mans polled doubted the seriousness of the
United States and of the Soviet Union in
negotiations and by now this doubt is
heightened by the rift in relations resulting
from the Korean airline incident.
No one can blame West Germans for
being skeptical. Yet, this skepticism puts
the whole schedule of U.S. nuclear deploy
ment in serious jeopardy. Last spring,
when Chancellor Helmut Kohl won the
election, he was chosen on a ticket that
called for double-track negotiations in
Geneva: The acceptance of deployment of
Pershing missiles on German soil would ,
require that, as a premise, serious negotia
tions working toward arms reductions
' would take place.
This proposal deployment coupled
with negotiations was acceptable last
spring to the majority of West Germans,
but since then there has been concern that
the promise of negotiations has been
abridged by the United States. Conse
quently, some Germans feel that the pro
mise to deploy should not be upheld
either.
nmmim roeo ahead and vim m&m ctim pb&ung tmiss as wf like.' '
As the time for deployment nears, the -number
of West Germans calling for post
poned deployment and extended negotia
tions is increasing. The latest poll of this
past summer indicated that 75 percent of
the West Germans wanted to postpone
nuclear deployment, and more significant
ly, that included 62 percent of the ruling
party, the Christian Democratic Union
Christian Socialist Union. Most West Ger
mans are only willing to allow deployment
if there is no other way to maintain a
balance between the superpowers. They
realize that chances are very slim that the
Pershing missile, once deployed, will ever
be removed except in the event of an ac
tual war.
One problem with nuclear deployment
is that there are no in-betweens. You either
do or you don't. The nature of this issue is
forcing West Germans to one extreme or
to the other, and the polarization is cramp
ing the West German ability to deal with
the issue.
Polarization of public opinion in West
Germany is further heightened by the
emotional depth required to take a stance.
And taking a stance means choosing the
best means of survival West German
survival, NATO survival, Soviet survival,
human survival. It is that basic.
The emotion in play is fear, and it be
comes a matter of deciding which fear is
greater: fear of the Russians, which calls
for strong deterrence, or fear of nuclear
potential, which calls for no more and pre
ferably fewer arms. The pendulum of
public opinion is swinging to the latter
and the need to halt deployment is growing
in urgency.
If predictions for this fall are correct,
the peaceful demonstrations will snap into
violence if they are unheard or passed
over. No one can know exactly how bad
the scene will be, but the ominous fear of
imminent destruction hangs over every
West German's head.
There will be no referendum to allow
the voice of the majority to drtermine
government actions. Without this as a re
course, West Germans must choose an al
ternative means of ensuring just repre
sentation, and they will be prepared to go
to great lengths for some this could
mean death in this demand. The demo
cratic process is being put to the test in
West Germany, for politicians are not
moving in step with the majority of public
opinion. If politicians do not represent the
will of the people, are they part of a func
tioning democracy?
In a worst-case scenario, it is conceiv
able that Kohl with about two-thirds of
his own party and three-quarters of his
total population advocating postponed
deployment; with people of all ages, all
classes, all parties, all creeds demonstrat
ing against deployment; with blood and
destruction littering cities and countryside
in the name of peace it is conceivable
that Kohl may be forced to appear before
NATO and say, "Look, guys, I'm sorry,
but I can't do this to my people. We can't
follow through on the deal and deploy
your Pershings."
It does not matter which side of the
issue you are on, for you to need to be
concerned about the tenor of events in
West Germany and the possible break
down of the present NATO alliance. It is
an irony that, in this year when we are
celebrating positive interaction through"
300 years of German-American emigra
tion, we are also facing a serious and po
tentially detrimental turning point in our
mutual relations. The gravest U.S. failure
at the present time is an inability to recog
nize the chasm in understanding between
the two countries.
As agents of deployment, the United
States must confront the volatility of this
issue in its true perspective. As. it is, the
physical distance from West Germany is
great and we are not in as great a danger
of being the first nuclear battleground.
The psychological distance is even greater,
and we do not know the West German
fear that for them the past has instilled, the
present must impose and the future possi
bilities tend to infer. But we must be will
ing and striving to draw these differences
into our consciousness; we cannot afford
to determine nuclear stability by adhering
to our perspective alone and ignoring all
others. Cohesion among allies must be
based on consensus among allies.
While the West Germans tear their
social fabric to shreds, we are wrong to as
sume our security is assured. Far from it.
Andrea Stumpf is a German and inter
national studies major from Chapel Hill.
!