Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Tuesday, August 5, 2003
EDITORIAL
Fraternity inferno
illuminates need
for better houses
As fire erupted on the third floor of the University's Theta
Chi fraternity house Monday and spread to the second
floor, students gathered on East 19th Avenue to watch the
spectacle. Flames rose from the house and smoke filled the
air. Dozens of firefighters arrived to fight the blaze.
It is an event to remember.
It's likely that many of the individuals who watched
firefighters cut into the ceiling of the three-story house
have partied on the premises. What's more likely, how
ever, is that if this blaze occurred during the school year,
someone would likely have been seriously injured. In
stead of watching for the sake of watching, students in
stead would have been fearing for the well-being of
friends and acquaintances.
Monday's fire should serve as a wake-up call to the Uni
versity's administration, fraternities and sororities.
University President Dave Frohnmayer announced in
2002 a new requirement for fraternities and sororities to
comply with new guidelines, including an alcohol ban.
Another of the requirements is the installation of fire sprin
kler systems by fall 2004.
While many fraternity and some sorority members de
cried the University's stance, it seems clear that a change is
desperately needed. Unfortunately, these changes are go
ing to come at quite a cost.
Monday's blaze reportedly began in a room where no
one was living. If the cause of the fire is determined to be
electrical, this will just go to show how poor the conditions
of some of these fraternity and sorority houses are.
Theta Chi might be an extreme example, but many of
these houses have been run into the ground over the years,
and the building corporations that oversee the houses
don't make necessary upgrades.
Clearly, these organizations aren't out to make sums of
money, so upkeep on these million-dollar buildings can
be troublesome. Ihe costs of proper repairs and upgrades
on buildings that are more than 50 years old could easily
equal the overall property value.
Given these challenges, the future of fraternities and
sororities on campus has to be at least somewhat ques
tioned. Upgrades and repairs are obviously needed, and
without them, students are in danger. The University has
threatened to close down chapters that don't meet the
school's endorsement standards; apparently there's some
good in these measures.
Conversely, many chapters will not be able to afford
these changes, and will be forced to shut down. The Uni
versity will likely not help fund these important renova
tions, despite the fact that it is the establishment requir
ing them.
The University is also not shy about the need to provide
more housing to its students, and it is probable that frater
nity and sorority houses will become the University's
newest properties in the coming years, right after these or
ganizations are forced to shut down.
Whether the University, in turn, decides to keep the ag
ing buildings for fraternities and sororities is still unknown.
This much is clear, though; The University greek system,
like its housing, is dangerously on the verge of falling apart.
The University community should be grateful that no
one was injured in Monday's Theta Chi fire, and those con
cerned with the greek system's welfare should remember
the event in the future, it's time to upgrade these facilities
before someone gets hurt.
EDITORIAL POLICY
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses can be sent to letters
@dailyemerald.com. Letters to the editor and guest
commentaries are encouraged. Letters are limited to
250 words and guest commentaries to 550 words.
Authors are limited to one submission per calendar
month. Submission must include phone number and
address for verification. The Emerald reserves the right
to edit for space, grammar and style.
Deregulation disaster
ine t-eaerai communication commis
sion voted June 2 to roll back a number of
rules regarding media ownership, thus
making it possible for one corporation to
own television stations that together reach
45 percent of U S. households.
The rationale for the decision was that it
is apparently in the public's interest for
large corporations to own everything un
der the sun. A few people in the U S.
House of Representatives seemed to feel
differently, however, as expressed in the
400-21 vote to stop the deregulation. Now
it's up to the U.S. Senate to keep the old
regulations in place.
But the vote is no reason for those inter
ested in media diversity to stop worrying.
The provision stopping the new media
ownership rules was attached to a spend
ing bill, one that provided funding for the
State, Commerce and Justice departments.
It was one of those broad bills that tend to
gather extra provisions like warm flesh
gathers leeches. Opponents of the FCC rul
ing took advantage of the bill — which
would have passed anyway — and threw
on a rider blocking the new FCC rules
from taking effect. Most of the representa
tives who voted for the bill weren't ex
pressing an opinion on media ownership,
just passing a routine spending bill with
some kinks to be worked out later.
Also, the FCC rider in the bill could sim
ply be taken out in a House-Senate compro
mise, as Republican leaders have already
pointed out. Even if the bill does make it
through, it can always be vetoed by that wor
thy defender of public good, President Bush.
And there are already talks of more extensive
regulatory rollbacks, if that's any indication
of the House vote's effectiveness.
Ryan Nyburg
Budget rack
All of this hoopla brings up a simple
question: Why? What pressing need is
there for media deregulation, and what
purpose will it serve? FCC Chairman
Michael Powell has stated the rollback will
"benefit Americans by protecting localism,
competition and diversity." I'm pretty sure
that was the purpose of having the regula
tions there in the first place, but who am I
to argue with the hCX, chairman?
It seems to me that allowing larger com
panies to gobble up smaller companies until
all media output is controlled by two or
three giants will not be benefi
cial to localism or competi
tion. And if you want to
talk about diversity, a few
minutes watching net
work television
ought to be
enough to
gauge how
interested
the media con
glomerates are
in expressing a
wide range of opinions.
All the artifice about doing this in the
interest of the average American is a
rather bland and cynical front to
Powell's real views on the issue He
never mentions the 71 dosed-door
the same industry he regulates.
/ There is no independent over
Jj sight of the board's investment de
dsions, and the fund is essentially a
y private organization, meaning it legally
cannot have government officials sitting on
its board. The kicker is that since it was
founded, the board has
spent $7 million in ex
ecutive salaries and
other expenses
while investing
only $9 million in
upstart communica
tions firms, accord
ing to the Center for
Public Integrity.
This means a
man who prof
its from the
industry
meetings the commissioners had with broad
cast company officials, or that the commis
sion had a grand total of one public meeting
before voting on the new relaxed regulations.
All of this is a matter of public record, and the
Center for Public Integrity has a nice little re
port about the whole thing.
This is much like the time Powell didn't
mention he had a vested interest — he was a
member, but not the chairman, of the com
mittee at the time — in seeing the FCC ap
prove the AOL-Time Warner merger back in
2001; Powell is the son of the eminent retired
General and Secretary of State Colin Powell,
who was on AOL's Board of Directors.
Powell isn't just interested in making prof
it for others, however. In 1996 Congress cre
ated a fund to kick-start small communica
tions firms, run by a board of officials from
the Treasury Department, the Small Busi
ness Administration, the FCC and four
members from the private sector. Powell
holds the FCC seat, meaning he invests in
being deregulated is spearheading its
deregulation. This adds a nice criminal
twist to the ruling.
If the FCC's relaxed rules go into place, it
will allow a single company to own televi
sion stations reaching 45 percent of U.S.
households, an increase of 10 percent
from the old cap. It will also allow a single
company to own both a newspaper and a
broadcast station in single market. More
over, a single company could own multi
ple television stations in a market with
nine or more stations, such as a market
about the size of Eugene-Springfield.
All of this will severely limit who has ac
cess to broadcasting. The number of voices
on the airwaves will be that much smaller,
and free speech will be that much more
limited. Pleasant thought, eh?
Ryan Nyburg is a freelance reporter
for the Emerald. His opinions do not
necessarily represent those of the Emerald.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Students must get involved
in Shared Governance Policy
The July 28 Eugene City Council vote to
grant the University's Department of Public
Safety the authority to issue citations was the
last step in a University administration-guid
ed process that made significant changes on
our campus without student consultation.
Whether or not this neglect of student input
was intentional, the administration's exclu
sion of students in important campus policy
formations and changes highlights the need
for students to be included in the decisions
that affect our school.
One avenue in which students may de
mand a role in the decision-making
process on campus is by making use of the
Shared Governance Policy instituted by
the Oregon University System this past
April. The policy explicitly seeks to "en
courage and facilitate student involvement
in university decision-making." Current
University procedures must be changed in
order to fulfill the wishes of the OUS
board and its policy of shared governance.
Based on the administration's recent ac
tions, however, it is unlikely that necessary
changes will come from the top down; in
stead, students must involve themselves in the
process of implementing the Shared Gover
nance Policy. I encourage any and all interest
ed students to stop by the ASUO office, or e
mail me at asuogov@gladstoneuoregon.edu,
to learn more about shared governance and
how one may become involved in the imple
mentation of the policy.
Tim Johnson
senior
history, political science
ASUO Shared Governance/
University Affairs Director
ONLINE POLL
Each week, the Emerald publishes the
previous week’s poll results and the
coming week’s poll question. Visit
www.dailyemerald.com to vote.
Last week: Do you regularly donate
blood?
Results: 49 total votes
No, needles hurt—28.6 percent,
or 14 votes
No, I am ineligible to donate - 26.5
percent, or 13 votes
Leave me alone! -18.4 percent,
or 9 votes
Yes, it’s my duty as a citizen —14.3
percent, or 7 votes
Yes, I like the cookies and juice -12.2
percent, or 6 votes
This week: What’s the worst movie of
the summer?
Choices: "Gigli"; “The League of
Extraordinary Gentlemen”; “Spy Kids 3
D: Game Over”; "Charlie’s Angels: Full
Throttle”; “Dumb and Dumberer: When
Harry Met Lloyd”; Leave me alone!