Editorial
'Amerika' expectation
led to disappointment
It seems that once a year television comes out with a
program that attracts the not-so-pleased attention of a group
of people, one which is instantly propelled into the
limelight before shooting is even finished.
This year, ,,Amerika,, followed in the footsteps of such
greats as ‘The Day After” and “The Maltese
Fa Icon” (colorized version, of course). Yet even after all the
hype and controversy died down, ABC’s six-part, 14-hour
mini-series emerged as just that — another mini-series.
Months before it aired, opponents condemned
“Amerika,” saying it portrayed the Soviets in a negative
light. Further, the basic premise of the Soviet Union taking
over the United States — because we lost patriotism — seem
ed totally unrealistic. They feared people would develop in
accurate perceptions of the Soviets and this in turn could
damage foreign policy relations.
Despite the negative feelings surrounding the show,
“Amerika” claimed the number one rating spot on Sunday
evening. The first episode beat out both NBC and CBS
ratings combined.
The American public, however, proved not to be as
passive as the “Amerikan” public. In newspaper response
polls and calls to television stations, people realized the plot
line was flawed. The idea that the Soviets could just walk in
and take over the country without a fight looked as
ridiculous on screen as it sounded in opponents’
complaints.
Most people watching the show were skeptical of its
message. The curiosity inspired by the hype is largely
responsible for the ratings sweep of its first episode. But pro
bably the most important response felt by some was a renew
ed sense of patriotism. It’s a very basic concept, but one the
mini-series conveyed quite well.
Overall, “Amerika" was just another mini-series. And
not a very good one, at that. Aside from the plot line, the
first episodes were long and boring. Viewers had to sit
through hours of tape while ABC set the scene and introduc
ed the characters.
All the hype about a propaganda program led to a big
disappointment. Any message ABC hoped to communicate
was lost in the set up.
This is not to say the point of “Amerika” is not valid.
Sure, Soviets invading the U.S. is unrealistic, but the Soviet
Union has taken over other countries. A change in govern
mental systems and ideologies is a serious matter. Even if
the chances of a take-over happening in America are slim, it
is important that we realize the impact one can have on a
country. “Amerika” had the chance to do this and failed.
Unfortunately, shows that do effectively convey the
fears and emotions involved in destroying an old govern
ment and establishing a new system haven’t received half
the attention “Amerika” did.
A Children s Story, tor example, is to Amerika”
what “On the Beach*’ was to “The Day After.” The impact
conveyed in the one hour long “A Children’s Story” is ten
times more powerful than all 14 hours of “Amerika.”
Anyone who has seen the show knows and remembers the
emotions produced when a classroom of children cut up the
American flag.
“Amerika” was viewed by more people than will ever
see “A Children’s Story." The potential it had to be a power
ful and important mini-series, however, was lost in a
lengthy, superficial production.
LWS.WBS
Letters
Research
With a reputation like the
University's, why would it even
consider allowing classified
research? President Olum who
worked on the Manhattan Pro
ject — the classified project that
gave the world its first atomic
bombs — can't even remember
the difference between
classified and proprietary
research.
Oh yes! There is a difference.
On Jan. 2B. 1987, at the River
front Research Park Commis
sion. Charles Minshall of the
Battelle Corporation — one of
the ten largest defense contrac
tors in the United States —
presented the Battelle Feasibili
ty Study for the Riverfront
Research Project. Me said. “Cer
tain people have classified and
proprietary research mixed up.
However, they are two different
things.”
Me also said that this “pro
ject" could not survive without
classified research (sound
familiar?). Do you suppose Bat
telle does any classified
research? Would you think that
Battelle would have any interest
in prompting classified research
for our park? You couldn’t im
agine a more unbiased feasibili
ty study, could you? Of all the
Oregon Daily
Emerald
The Oregon Dally Emerald Is published Monday
through Friday except during exam week and vacations
by the Oregon Dally Emerald Publishing Co., at the
University of Oregon, Eugene. Oregon, 97403
The Emerald operates independently of the University
with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial Union
and is a member of the Associated Press
The Emerald is private property The unlawful removal
or use of papers is prosecutable by law
General Staff
Advertising Director Susan Thelen
Production Manager Wayne Michael lottinville
Classified Advertising Alyson Simmons
Assistant to the Publisher Jean Ownbey
Advertising Sales: Peter LaFleur / Sales Manager
Teresa Acosta, Brent Collins, Beryl Israel. Janelie Heit
mann, Laura Goldstein, Catherine Lilja, Rick Martz.
Joseph Menzel, Peter Miller, Joan Wildermuth
News ana taitonai
Display Advertising and Business
Classified Advertising
Letter Perfect Graphics
Production
Circulation
t>«t> 5511
686 3712
666 4343
666 5511
666-4361
666-5511
Editor
Managing Editor
News Editor
Spectrum Editor
Spectrum Assistant Editor
Editorial Page Editors
Sports Editor
Photo Editor
Spectrum Photo Editor
Graphics Editor
Night Editor
Associate Editors «
Community
Politics
Higher Education / Administration
University Affairs
Student Government
Student Activities
General Assignment
General Assignment
General Assignment
Michelle Brence
Lucinda Dillon
Michael Rivers
Stephen Maher
Stanley Nelson
Michael Drummond
Angle Muniz
Capi Lynn
Michael Wilhelm
John Giustina
Lorraine Rath
Jolayne Houtz
Jolayne Houtz
Nick Reed
Chris Norred
B J Thomsen
Carolyn Lamberson
Sarah Kitchen
Karen Creighton
Dennis Fernandes
Scott Maben
Reporters: Sean Axmaker, Mary Courtis, Gary Henley,
Janet Paulson
Photographers: Sherlyn Bjorkgren, Shu-Shing Chen,
Maria Corvallis. Derrel Hewitt, Bobbie Lo, Dan Wheeler
Production: Michele Ross / Ad Coordinator
Kelly Alexandre, Elizabeth Asher, Ronwin Nicole Ashton,
Virginia Baniaga, Sandra Bevans, Sara Briscoe, Shu
Shlng Chen, Janet Emery, Judith Gatz, Lisa Haggerty,
Donna Leslie, Curtis Lott, Kelli Mason, Mike McGraw,
Rob Miles, Angelina Muniz, Julie Paul, Ingrid White,
Serena Williams. X Kang Xie
companies that do feasibility
studies. 1 wonder why (how)
this company was chosen?
Minshall used the Silicon
Valley as an example of
“prospering” semi-conductor
industry. However, what he
forgot to mention is the high
rates of business failure, the
high unemployment and the
polluted environment surroun
ding this prosperous, clean
industry.
As a matter of fact, few of the
kinds of companies that Battelle
recommended locating in the
park are making a profit. Maybe
that's why the park can’t sur
vive without classified
research. Only those
“research" companies (like Bat
telle) that are dealing with the
Department of Defense are mak
ing any money.
Richard Gold
Senior, English and geography
Cheap claim
Oregon Commentator Editor
Duane Dungannon's remarks at
a forum titled, “Campus Media:
Editors and Dialogue," subse
quently quoted in the Emerald,
were full of iactual errors and
misperceptions.
Dungannon, under whose
tutelege the Commentator has
become the most knee-jerking
conservative paper at the
University yet, described the
founders of the Commentator as
“reactionary-minded."
Unfortunately for Dungan
non’s credibility, this is ob
viously not true: early copies of
the Commentator and discus
sions writh the founders and
others would bear this out.
1 was the key co-founder of
the Commentator and am about
90 percent libertarian. The
other co-founders of the Com
mentator. Richard E. Burr, Mike
Rust and Bob Davis, also were
not reactionaries, except
perhaps to the extent that Rust
is a former liberal.
Dungannon also claimed that
the paper has “evolved" to now
including journalism students
on its staff. A check of old stu
dent directories will show- that
almost everyone on the 1983-84
staff members were.
In short, Dungannon’s com
ments show incredible ig
norance about his newspaper’s
past and/or a blatant attempt to
dishonestly ‘‘win points” with
the University community.
Dane S. Claussen, president
The Press, Ltd.
Misquoted
In response to Alex Gardner’s
letter (ODE, Feb. 11), I would
like to make a few comments.
With just a 250 word-limit, it
is not possible to give you a
physics lesson. If you care to
debate a point, you must not ask
what it means. Instead, give me
your interpretation. You mis
quoted me. Granted, I left out a
word that 1 intended to type;
however, you left out four
words. Don’t you hate when
that happens?
“...the Second Law (of
Thermodynamics) was not
always the case.” You mis
quoted me here, too — I cor
rected it for you. Where did our
planet come from? Is it con
ceivable that an ENORMOUS
amount of energy in space
created a complex solar system?
That’s a major negative entropy
change — bad news!
And what caused the energy?
Where did the material come
from? Was it “just there”? Do
atheists have more “faith” than
theists? The Law isn’t a law, or
at least it hasn’t always been
one.
Also, an update to Professor
Dodds’ claim (ODE, Jan. 29) to
the $400 being offered for an ir
resolvable conflict between
Christian ty and secular reason
ing. W'e regret that Dodds did
not write in himself to
withdraw his claim. I took the
time to go to his lab and explain
to him where he was mistaken,
and he did admit that he was
wrong.
Understand, what we regret
the most is that he doesn’t seem
to show much respect for
anything but his own pride.
Brian Frary
Biology