Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 2, 2000)
Monday Editor in chief: Jack Clifford Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard Newsroom: (541) 346-5511 Room 300, Erb Memorial Union P.O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 E-maii: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL J. KLECKNER opededitor@journalist.com Readers are right: Yahoo! ad series went beyond bad taste Commentary Jack Clifford “The Oregon Daily Emerald re serves the right to accept or reject any advertising.” Such simple words for a very complicated issue. That sentence, however, is the beginning of the Emerald’s advertising policy, which came under attack last week be cause of a promotional campaign from Yahoo! Messenger. Many readers have seen or heard about the crudely-designed, one page inserts in the Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday issues of the Emerald. The content of the ads —supposedly an attempt by Yahoo! to be edgy — ranged, in the minds of some readers, from being sexist and homophobic to sophomoric to outright threatening. Those same re actions occurred amongst a good portion of the Emerald office. An estimated 20 people on cam pus, mostly University administra tors and mostly women, called the Emerald office or sent in letters to the editor to register concerns and condemn this newspaper for accept ing the ads. Another group of ap proximately 12 students and leaders of several student groups met per sonally with me to express that the Yahoo! campaign is just a continua tion of what they believe is the Emerald’s irresponsibility when it accepts money to run offensive ads. Every reader who was outraged, any person who felt threatened by this campaign and anyone who took time to call or write the Emerald with criticism or concern is right. They’re right because that’s how they were impacted by the Yahoo! ads, and they’re right because they took action, hopefully against Ya hoo!, as well. Many students on the newsroom staff— myself included—were em barrassed or angry for three consec utive days when we saw those ads in the Emerald. So, what’s an editor to do? In this case, the best defense is to be up front and explain a bit about how the Emerald operates as an organization. There are two essential compo nents that keep the Emerald pub lishing five days a week throughout the school year. Our sales depart ment generates revenue for the pa per through its efforts and the news room writes stories and snaps photos to fit the space not filled with ads in each day’s issue. While the two departments share office space, we are careful about the in formation we share on a day-to-day basis. Just as much as a sales representa tive doesn’t want a newsroom edi tor traipsing around his or her space questioning each and every ad sold, I don’t want anyone from the sales department wandering into my of fice and telling me what stories should run in the newspaper. That’s not being arrogant or mean-spirited, it just points out that I would rather not be beholden to give any advertiser preferential news coverage based on the prospect of selling an ad to that per son or company. In short, although I was made aware that the Yahoo! campaign was scheduled to run, the sales manager gave me just general infor mation about the content, which is how I prefer to handle that aspect of the operation. However, ignorance doesn’t ex cuse responsibility, and my name and title go on every Emerald print ed. Therefore, it is my obligation to accept and deal with the criticism when someone is offended by something — anything — that ends up on a page. Under the aforemen tioned division between the adver tising and newsroom departments, however, as far as advertising goes, the buck doesn’t stop on my desk, even if it does slow down. Which brings us to the concept of an advertising policy. There are attempts at any news paper to be careful about the taste and sensitivity of its readership; what you might read or see in Letters to the editor Support fair trade through consumerism As mentioned in the Sept. 25 ODE article, Starbucks is to be ap plauded for responding to socially minded consumers and developing a fair-trade line. But before we labor/environmen tally-sensitive consumers go rushing to support this newly progressive company, be aware that Starbucks is currently only selling this coffee packaged: you cannot buy a fair trade brand in a cup! Until Starbucks provides brewed fair-trade alterna tives to caffeine-hungry students, our only alternative is to buy sweat shop coffee from them or (what I will be doing) continue to support the Duck Stop, the only consistent fair trade vendor on the strip. We can work to change this policy by showing a presence at Starbucks and insisting on being served the Mexican shade-grown variety over the counter—or taking our business elsewhere. Some Starbucks shops are willing to french-press cups of the brand upon request, and the more customers who ask, the more likely that fair-trade brands will be offered in the future (and show Starbucks that there is profit in fair-trade.) To those who still wonder what all the fuss is about, my personal view is that at two cups per school day, at $1 a cup, I spend $522 a year on retail coffee and can make a siz able personal impact on one of the most exploitative industries by choosing to buy fair-trade brands over sweatshop brands. It’s easy, cheap and convenient socially-re sponsible consumerism. Who wouldn’t want to switch? R. Charli Carpenter Graduate student Political science Vote no on Measure 9 Save the Chess club! Vote no on Measure 9! The OCA is at it again, this time with the “Student Protec tion Act” which would eliminate any non-negative mention of homo sexuality or bisexuality in public schools through the college level. Whatever your feelings about these issues, it is important that you be aware that this law, if passed, could eliminate all extra-curricular clubs. It is clear that any gay-friendly extracurricular club would be pro hibited under this measure. If that sounds like good news to you, read on. A student in a Utah school re quested formation of a gay-straight alliance club. The school district denied the request, and the student sued. The court ruled that federal law did not allow schools receiving federal funding to discriminate based on club content. The school board was faced with allowing the club or disallowing ALL extracur ricular clubs. Or losing federal funding. They chose to disallow all extracurricular clubs. If Measure 9 passes, every school district in Oregon will have to choose between eliminating all ex tracurricular clubs or losing state or federal funding. That’s a choice we can’t afford to make! Don’t let the OCA’s poorly-crafted bill hurt our schools. Vote NO on Measure 9. Shasta K. Wilson CIS Booing unsportsmanlike Coach Len Casanova didn’t want any booing from students at football games. Back in fall of 1950, as a newly-elected yell king, I asked for an interview with our new football coach, Len Casanova, and he made it very clear that he considered boo ing unsportsmanlike, and firmly stated that he did not approve of that kind of conduct — so, we com plied. It was a good call. Our student body was in the neighborhood of 4,500, and I recall reading of University President Newburn praising the spirit of the fans, but I dare say the spirit of the fans at the recent UCLA game in Autzen Stadium was deafening and awesome. Congratulations to the cheerleaders and fans. If booing were eliminated, the sport would be elevated. Ron Symons WRC requirements not too re strictive You should really take a look at what the Worker Rights Consor tium is about. Yes, they ask for a liv ing wage, but they admit that the definition of a living wage is still unclear and so they don't require it at the schools, and they haven't yet had to deal with the living wage in apparel companies. The require ments are the same whether at home or abroad. The most impor tant things that they do require: • Freedom to organize without threat of job loss/other penalties • Overtime cannot be required • No discrimination (including in pay) based on gender, race, etc. • Maximum work week of either 48 hours or the national maximum, whichever is less • Maternity leave and no re quired pregnancy testing at any time • No forced labor (indentured, bonded, or prison labor) • Release the information about compliance to the public (wage, hours, health/safety conditions) • Are these requirements too re strictive? It doesn't seem like it to me. Want to actually see what they do require? Read at their site: http://www.workersrights.org Eric Anholt Portland, OR Willamette Week won’t end up in The Register-Guard. Although inde pendent from the University, the Emerald uses a college-age audi ence to determine tastelessness and sensitivity. College students’ defini tion of what is in bad taste is often broader than society as a whole, which is why Yahoo! chose this newspaper and other college-ori ented newspapers across the coun try to run its campaign. But several of those students and student leaders who expressed their repulsion and fear to me found the Yahoo! ads to go beyond bad taste, and fall right into an endorsement of what are serious issues in society: rape and homophobia. They also ac cused the Emerald of endorsing those social ills, and called for an apology in this editorial. While I am outraged that such ad vertising flourishes in society and disappointed that it found a place in this newspaper, as just one link on the chain, I cannot apologize for the Emerald’s actions. And I cannot apologize for a newsroom that did not see the ads before they were pub lished. In addition, I am quite com fortable with the belief that no one at the Emerald, in any department, endorses rape or homophobia. I do, however, commend those readers and students who ex pressed their outrage, and I call on even more people, especially stu dents, to do the same should a simi lar advertisement run in the future. According to the Emerald’s adver tising manager, the amount of re sponse she received has swayed her to reject any future Yahoo! ads with similar content, just as the initial sentence in this editorial states she can do. That’s how changes are made in society and I hope that anyone who wants to comment on the advertise ments will call Yahoo! or the Emer ald and make your voice heard. Ad campaign offensive, demeaning We are writing to address the outrage that we felt as we re turned to the University for our first day of classes, only to be confronted with the message that our most valuable asset, as women, is the ability to take our shirts off for men. As if this was not offensive enough, we were then confront ed, the following day, with an other ad that degraded and hu miliated us as women by poking fun at the health and safety of all women. And now, the most recent Ya hoo! advertisement in Thursday's Emerald not only demeans and re duces us to mere sexual objects but also reinforces, just one more time, that homophobic ads and comments are acceptable on cam pus. Sexist and homophobic atti tudes and comments are not new, but it is time that the ODE reflect and see the decision to run this ad campaign as a sign of irresponsi ble journalism. Organizations like the ODE must realize that ads like these contribute to the lack of safety on campus as much as poor campus lighting does. As a student-run newspaper, the ODE should be wary of alienating and objectify ing more than half of the student body, as well as many other con stituents of the campus commu nity. Nilda Brooklyn Multicultural Advocate ASUO Executive Marian Fowler Events Coordinator ASUO Women’s Center I have had the pleasure of see ing the wonderful Yahoo! ads that the Emerald has been run ning this week. I have to say that the Emerald has really outdone themselves this time. The ads have been an insult to women and also to the University cul ture. The first ad requests that a “stoned” guy come look at a woman taking her top off. If that wasn't bad enough, a second ad ran with a guy telling some woman to call her because his rash (STD?) came back. The Emerald has really out done themselves this time. These ads are demeaning, while addi tionally perpetuating violence and objectification of women, and at the same time insulting men as lowlifes who can’t even write legibly (basically insulting the entire college culture). Is the purpose of this ad campaign to ac tually relate to the culture? Is the college culture as pathetic as these ads imply? Are you that desperate for ad vertising dollars that ultimately denigrate the value of your pub lication while creating litter everywhere that someone else has to clean up? It’s unfortunate that a college publication would go to such great lengths to hurt so many while the actual result is a negative impact on their own im age. Is this the model of profes sional journalism that the Emer ald would like students to take with them into their careers? And can you believe it? Some one actually got paid to create those ads. Shyla Yearby I wanted to express my con cerns over the ads running in your newspaper about Yahoo! mail. I find it interesting that while we try so hard to work on campus diversity, women’s rights and campus safety we are bombarded with tasteless ads about “crotchless panties” and women “taking off their top.” I sure hope that the decision to run this ad campaign was a mis take that you are deeply regret ting. There are other ways to promote or advertise a product, Yahoo!. On that note I would of fer my version of this ad. ‘Yahoo! — Start apologizing for your be havior and start treating women like they should be treated: with respect and equality. Thanks. — Daniel Daniel Valle Senior
