Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (May 19, 1981)
opinion yours Opinion piece In the May 7 Emerald, there was an artiqle in Thursday Revue on National Public Radio. This piece of writing belonged on an opinion page, not in an entertainment section. It started out validly enough as an informative article, telling of the radio drama heard on NPR stations KWAX and KLCC. Then writer Joe Cone started referring to "the opposition between good and evil" and how the Death Star could "destroy entire planets." But, somehow, Cone got on a pessimistic track about Reagan, the U S. defense system and the space shuttle The article is tied up loosely by words of doom about NPR’s funding woes caused by Reagan’s budget cutting. Somehow, this opinion piece made the connection between the space shuttle and the defense system seem like fact. This article should never have been printed it in that form. On the surface, Cone’s article was about the radio play. But its real point was to attack the Reagan administration and the space defense policy. It could be argued that Cone was giv ing a perspective on what Star Wars really meant to earth-bound U S. ci tizens. Perhaps. But if that were his intention, the article should have started that way. Instead it began with an infor mative look at a radio play and then launched into an attack on Reagan policy. The article was an example of mis leading journalism. It should have been edited for inclusion in Thursday Revue by leaving out the reference to U S. military capability in space. If that were done, I would be pleased — the Star Wars portion was well done. It could also have been used on the opinion page, prominently marked as an opinion. In that case, I would urge Cone to strengthen his arguments against military uses of space, and to shorten the irrelevant reference to Star Wars. As a journalist and as a member of the Society of Professional Journalists, I was angered by this article’s invasion into a usually outstanding paper. Bryon V. Caloz Journalism & computer science graduate Disgraceful Dave Plodding through the drizzle on my way to class Friday, I stopped to pick up a 'ANY&OW GOT ANY USE TOR A THIN, WIDE LIBERAL?' Page 4 I IT CbMTS WIH THE TERRITORY PBB6S <VAi»t>T¥ copy of the Emerald. Much to my disgust, WHO should be (dis)gracing the front page but Dave Sweeney — "the man I love to hate"! “Forecaster enjoys zany weather an tics. ”1 read To this I reply, I'm cer tainly glad HE does! Personally, I find weather forecasts geared to the intellect of mentally inept fourth graders to be insulting. I have nothing against adding a little "zip” or “zing” to the news, but 5 find Dave’s TV presentations to be as pleasant and entertaining as Cathy Rigby’s. I have often questioned the skill, talent, and educational background required by KEZI to be a weatherman. Suprisingly, I read, Dave at least has an educational background. Finally, in the future, I hope the Emerald can find something more timely and important to put on the front page. I suggest putting any future ‘ Dave Sweeney” articles in a more appropriate place — by the comics! James Gill Junior Feminist racism? I find the upcoming Women’s Sympo sium to be very important in the educa tion of everyone, especially when the ERA has already been defeated in a major state such as Illinois and the govenrment lies in the hands of a poli tical party openly opposing the ERA. With racism on the rise and with violence against women a daily fact, the Women’s Symposium is a necessity. That is why I am concerned about the way the sym posium workshops have been announ ced. The flyer announces: “Women's Sym posium racism: taking action ” The workshops are listed in three separate groups: “For white women only,” “for women of color only,” and for a mixed group. I find it very hard to believe that the struggle against racial discrimination will be successful if, to develop it, one separates people based on their color. The simultaneity of the workshops is a valid way to make people choose the one that interests them the most according to their priorities. But the words used in the flyer are clear. “Three separate groups,” and the word “only,' points out very clearly the intentions of the organizers — compulsory separation of women by skin color and not their particular interest. The struggle is for women’s rights. Why aren’t they allowing women to exercise the right to participate in a workshop about an ethnic group different than their own? You can have three workshops at the same time about different racial issues related to women. But you cannot deny the right of human beings to participate in whatever they like if you base your decision on the race or sex of that human being. Incidently, I wonder if that segregation established in the Women’s Symposium, which is based on race and sex, doesn’t violate the University policy: “the University of Oregon affirms the right of all individuals to equal opportunity in education and employment, without regard to age, race, religion, color, sex, marital status, handicap, national origin or any other extraneous considerations not related to effective performance.” Finally, I would say that those words “For white women only" resemble similar ones that used to be posted on bathroom doors not long ago in the racist south. Sergio Antillano Graduate, interdisciplinary studies Reagan euphoria While I was in South Africa last winter, there was a general feeling of euphoria among the white ruling minority of that country; less than a week before my arrival Ronald Reagan had become President of the United States. To white South Africans this meant more passive acceptance by the U S. government of their inhumane racial segregation policy of apartheid. It also meant a more overt policy of support for their brutal cam paign against the people of Namibia and Angola. During my two-month stay, I was able to witness the day-to-day horror that black South Africans experience under the oppressive white regime that con trols their country. I was also able to speak to a number of recently dis charged soldiers about their experience in the South African Defense Force. The acts of violence being committed against the rightful owners of Namibia, South Africa and Angola by the South African government cannot and must not be ignored. Since my return, I have grown in creasingly concerned with the American foreign policy that has since taken shape towards that region of the African con tinent. Now that our nation’s honeymoon with racist South Africa has been further clarified by Foreign Minister Roelof F. Botha’s recent visit to the White House (May 15), I hope the American people will take a much closer look at their country’s relationship with both this and other repressive neo-fascist regimes in “the free world.” Christian Gunther Sophomore, undeclared Tuesday, May 19,1981
