Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Monday, May 24, 2004
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Travis Willse
E DITORIAL
Maddy and Eddy:
Good riddance!
Maddy who? Eddy what?
Oh, right, our student leaders. Those guys.
Well, until today, anyway. It's been a year since the pair took office — a
doozy, really — and today is the last day of their reign. Of terror.
Did we say that out loud?
A quick recap of the past year, from start to finish: Questionable campaign
accounting, alleged assault and criminal mischief charges, violation of ASUO
constitutional duties (resulting in the ASUO Constitution Court chief jus
tice calling Melton unfit for office), gross mismanagement of incidental fees,
nonlinear justifications for Executive recommendations and conflicts of in
terest galore! But don't forget the traditional we-didn't-get-a-damn-thing
done routine.
For reader convenience, let's review some of ASUO President Maddy
Melton and ASUO Vice President Eddy Morales' campaign goals:
• In an April 1, 2003, interview, Melton and Morales said their "legislative
goal is to keep — would be to keep education accessible for all." Right. Mean
while, tuition continues to rise — every year. Perhaps the power to change it is
out of their hands?
• Increasing student representation on decision-making bodies: Here's an
idea, why not make a campaign goal that isn't already one of the executive
duties mandated in the ASUO Constitution? According to Section 5.2 of said
Constitution: "The President shall nominate to the President of the Universi
ty, upon recommendation from the ASUO Committee on Committees, mem
bers to the student-faculty committees, appoint members to executive, ad
ministrative and ASUO student committees, and make all other
appointments to positions deemed necessary." This goal is, therefore, a self
fulfilling prophecy.
• Changing the University Housing contract to ... oh, does it really matter?
They abandoned that goal a long time ago. To their credit, the housing-code
issue replaced it and, imagine this, has made it to the business-friendly Eu
gene City Council. Good luck there.
• Advocating for law and graduate students. In the same April 1, 2003, in
terview, Morales stated that the campaign's third goal was to "build stronger
ties with our post-undergraduate students." How did Melton accomplish this?
She appointed Stephanie Day to the ASUO Elections Board, an official who
subsequently tried to schedule ASUO elections during the School of Law's
Dead Week — not once but twice.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves, here. We should give credit where credit's
due. On Nov. 14, Melton and Morales picked up some cigarette butts on the
grounds around the Knight Library. Great job, guys!
Moving right along to the big scandal of the year — the Taylor's fiasco —
we promise we won't make any inappropriate and tasteless jokes about that
whole Eddy thing. We really wouldn't want to "drag" his reputation into
the gutter.
Damn! Okay, seriously, no more of that! He's really been through enough
without us "smashing" his credibility onto the ground.
Ahhh! We better get off this topic, before someone accuses us of "assault
ing" his character, which could really get us into some "criminal mischief."
Screw it. Let's talk about the ASUO Programs Finance Committee budget
process. Wow, that whole affair was enough to make us need a drink or 10.
But there is one aspect of the process that we would like to discuss publicly,
just for the sake of full disclosure.
Far be it from us to accuse Morales of being biased as he prepared the Exec
utive recommendations for how much money PFC-funded groups should re
ceive, but did we mention the Emerald's budget was the only one out of more
than 125 to be vetoed? Or that the Emerald was never notified of said veto
until a PFC member informed the Emerald management 10 minutes before
the veto hearing? Or that the Emerald's budget was also used as the Execu
tive's justification for recommending that the ASUO Student Senate reject all
student group budgets?
See, many of the Executive's failures could have been remedied with a little
thing called accountability. For instance, why didn't Morales recuse himself
from working on the Emerald's budget when the paper was investigating and
publishing stories about his alleged assault of a female constituent? Why
didn't he at least acknowledge his conflict of interest? For that matter, why
did he not publicly recuse himself from the ASUO Legal Services budget —
the very same services that were providing his legal counsel for the charges
against him?
Most hilariously, Morales and his chum-in-budgeting, Mike Martell, argued
to cut the Emerald's funding because people who live off-campus could po
tentially pick up the paper, and thus student fees would go toward a product
not exclusively benefiting students.
But just weeks before, Morales and Martell recommended an increase in
OSPIRG's budget, which has been using student money for years and is sup
posedly cleaning up the Willamette River. The Willamette River, if anybody
is unfamiliar, stretches from West Central Oregon to Portland. Unless the
. campus has expanded several hundred miles while we weren't looking, that
river is indeed off-campus.
Hypocritical? Driven by narrow agendas? Just clueless? Hard to say.
But no hard feelings. We're just disappointed that up-and-coming leaders
such as yourselves could be so blatantly unprofessional. So farewell, and don't
let the cold, hard door hit yall in your asses on your way out.
wmwmmm
CHAIN of
COMMAND
y-% Wk %v
Wmjm
• •
,
i
■ 't ^ !v
tgf-J, -:
^vvjytwp s
' i>~> < >
; '"'Cv J§ v ^ m
/ ' V
S : ®
- xv5.:.
%
IlSPillip v- i*®
■ , *£
s' :% *. ;
■ V
8P»ii
<
■-a.U?<: •,>
J&sm I-- ip
I
F> ,v-wS.’
: #?r yi
i#
SO^\Pe
y^GKiyj
Steve Sack Star Tribune (KRT)
Dan Wieden says “Jump, ” I say
Interviewing for a job as a strip
per, streaking across a golf course
and playing Twister with a trucker
were just a few of the homework as
signments given to students in my
recent journalism seminar.
More than a week ago, I partici
pated in the Wieden workshop, a
two-day class instructed by Dan
Wieden himself, the creator of the
famous slogan "Just do it" and pres
ident of international advertising
agency Wieden + Kennedy. The
course was enjoyable last year, so I
decided to sign up again.
We introduced ourselves at the
beginning of the workshop, and
each named something we feared.
But I knew it was no ordinary intro
duction, especially when Dan
Wieden and the three men with
him from the agency were taking
notes on each response.
After we finished listing our fears,
which ranged from being scared of
monkeys to turning out like our
parents, we learned the workshop's
theme was confronting our fears
and capturing the act on video. Be
cause some of our fears were intan
gible, I was curious to see what they
would have us do, but I figured they
had some sort of plan.
As it turned out, they didn't have
much of a plan at all. They had only
planned about six tasks and had
students help come up with the rest.
My first assigned task was to ap
proach a stranger in the airport, act
ing as if I knew him or her, and con
vince the person to get coffee with
me. I couldn't figure out where the
fear confrontation was in this one;
it seemed more like a study in
manipulating strangers.
After asking the instructor how
that task forced me to address a
fear, I was assigned an alternate
task: Go to a wedding, and when
the minister asks if anyone objects,
stand up and say something. I
couldn't help but think that I
should make three copies of that
video: One for Mr. Wieden, one for
my mother and one for Satan to
tell him I'm on my way!
Marissa Jones
Cry me a river
There was no way I could go
through with the assignment, but
for a minute I actually pondered the
idea. Dan Wieden didn't have a
problem with it, so why did I? It
didn't take long before I realized
there was no moral justification for
mining someone's wedding; doing
it because someone else thought it
would be funny certainly wasn't rea
son enough.
Again I felt the need to question
and asked the men how they would
feel if someone did this at their wed
ding. I said I had no problem facing
my own fears, but I would not min
someone's special day in the process.
Most of them agreed, so I prepared
myself for yet another task.
New suggestions for my assign
ment induded kissing the groom at
the reception or stealing a wedding
present. Eventually they told me I
had to do a stand-up routine at a
comedy club. 1 could handle that.
I felt so relieved to have home
work that didn't involve sacrificing
my personal ethics that I almost for
got about the absurdity of the work
shop. But that night, as I edited my
Honors College thesis on advertis
ing and ethics, my concerns came
rushing back. Here 1 sat with a pa
per where I was trying to combat the
"sleazy" image of the advertising in
dustry an hour after I had been
slapped in the face with it. Although
my paper addresses the ethical im
plications advertising has on socie
ty, the topic of personal ethics came
up often in my research. In fact, in
one of my focus groups of five ad
vertising students, three of them
said they would sacrifice their per
sonal ethics because they would be
afraid of losing their job. Lose your
job? What about failing a class and
disappointing one of the biggest
names in advertising? This situation
was the one every workshop student
unfairly faced.
I met with the dean of the jour
nalism school to express my con
cerns. He suggested that maybe the
real fear to be faced in the workshop
was Dan Wieden. Didn't I already
do that? And what kind of work
shop is that? I want a workshop
where I tell people who idolize me
to do things such as "Go out on a
date with a blow-up doll" in order
Turn to JONES, page 3
ONLINE POLL
Each week, the Emerald publishes
the results of the previous poll and
the coming week’s poll question.
Visit http://www.dailyemerald.com
to vote.
Last week’s question: Do you think
the remaining Iraq prisoner abuse
photos should be released?
Results: 52 votes.
• Yes, open government is good
government: 50.0 percent or
26 votes.
• No, the depicted Iraqis have
been humiliated enough: 28.8
percent or 15 votes.
• Yes, people need to see more of
the war: 19.2 percent or 10 votes.
• No, many of the images are too
offensive: 1.9 percent or one vote.
This week: This week the greek
community is sponsoring their
annual boxing fundraiser. Do you
feel that boxing is an appropriate
fundraiser for the Boys & Girls
Clubs of America?
Choices: Yes — Boxing is fun
entertainment; Yes - Any
fundraiser for a worthy cause is
worthwhile; No — It’s promoting
violence; No - Surely the greek
community could come up with
something more interesting
and entertaining.