Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (Dec. 14, 2018)
A4 East Oregonian Friday, December 14, 2018 CHRISTOPHER RUSH Publisher KATHRYN B. BROWN Owner DANIEL WATTENBURGER Managing Editor WYATT HAUPT JR. News Editor Founded October 16, 1875 OUR VIEW Neuberger was ‘amazingly ahead of his times’ I n every era the new generation of his- torians and readers reconsiders the prominent figures of the past. Ameri- ca’s oldest universities have been going through this process. One of the most prominent revisions occurred at Yale University, where the name of John C. Cal- houn — who left the U.S. Senate for the Confederacy — was removed from one of its colleges and renamed for a woman who was a pio- neering admiral in the U.S. Navy. S teve Portland State Univer- F orreSter sity does not have that COMMENT challenge, because it is such a young institution. Nevertheless, last week it corrected a lesser injustice and redeemed itself by naming its administration building, which houses the president’s office, for U.S. Sen. Richard (Dick) Neuberger and his wife, Maurine. Another building at the university had been named in 1972 for Dick Neuberger, but later renamed for a major donor. I was invited to speak at last week’s ded- ication. Retirement from daily journalism has allowed me to resume the research on Dick Neuberger that I began in 1978. “Emi- nent Oregonians” will be the title of a book I am assembling with four other writers. One of the five chapters will be dedicated to him. Dick Neuberger was one of the most exciting Oregon personalities of the first half of the 20th century. When he died in 1960 at the age of 47, he was one of Amer- ica’s most prolific freelance writers and the author or co-author of six books. In 1954, he became the first Democrat Oregon had elected to the U.S. Senate in 40 years. In 1940, when he was elected to the Oregon House of Representatives, the state’s Democratic party was a stagnant and inarticulate backwater. He became the voice of a new party that was articulate about an array of concerns ranging from the envi- DICK NEUBERGER AUTHORED THE 1956 ENABLING LEGISLATION THAT CREATED THE FORT CLATSOP NATIONAL MEMORIAL ronment to human welfare and government structure. In essence, he created the intel- lectual foundation for Oregon’s postwar, modern Democratic party. The likes of Ron Wyden, Earl Blumenauer and Vera Katz are his political descendants. Neuberger’s sister, Jane Goodsell, cap- tured the significance of her brother’s icon- oclastic public career. “He was amazingly ahead of his times,” she told me in a 1978 interview. Dick’s legislative partnership with Mau- rine in the Oregon Legislature — he as a state senator, she as a representative — is without peer in Oregon history or, to my knowledge, in any other state legislature. The word environmentalist was not in our lexicon during his lifetime, but he was one, referred to as a conservationist. Two of his legislative achievements were the High- way Beautification Act and his sponsorship of what would become the National Wilder- ness Act of 1964. A history buff, one of Neuberger’s books was the Landmark book for children titled “The Lewis and Clark Expedition.” He channeled his enthusiasm for the Lewis and Clark story into the 1956 federal enabling legislation that created the Fort Clatsop National Memorial. My fascination with Neuberger began when I was about 8 years old. My father had known Dick since the 1930s when they met as writers at The Oregonian. Following his Senate election, the Neubergers came to our home in Pendleton. Over lunch Neu- berger spoke as he ate, about the falcon he had seen at an Air Force Academy football game with one of the Oregon universities. The Oregonian/The Daily Astorian Maurine and Richard Neuberger. Following that game, Dick had read every- thing he could find about falcons and pro- ceeded to share his newfound knowledge with us. I had never seen someone with such an enthusiastic, voracious intellect. My research has been an adventure — taking me primarily to the University of Oregon Special Collections in the Knight Library. My wife joined me for a research trip to the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library at Hyde Park. I drove across Kansas to the Eisenhower Library and also mined the Harry Truman Presidential Library in Inde- pendence, Missouri. In March I will be combing a collection of publications in the New York Public Library. Research on a long-deceased public per- son becomes a bit like an Easter egg hunt. I recently shared one of my discoveries with a historian friend. He shared my ela- tion, describing the thrill one feels at open- ing a box of papers that no one has seen in decades. Steve Forrester is the president and CEO of EO Media Group. Contact him at sforrester@eomediagroup.com. OTHER VIEWS Bigger questions for Google than search bias G Washington Post oogle Chief executive Sundar Pichai’s appearance before Con- gress on Tuesday augured an era of increased scrutiny for technology com- panies. The hearing was also a swan song for a Republican majority that has chosen to prioritize political posturing over more pressing issues about how powerful firms manage consumer data, and how they wield their influence in the world. Members of the conservative majority on the House Judiciary Committee spent much of their time hammering Mr. Pichai with baseless accusations that Google rigs its search results to censor conservative con- tent. Black-box algorithms will inevitably prioritize some content over other content, and to the extent companies can be trans- parent about how their systems work, they should be. But a single-minded and mind- less focus on a nonexistent left-wing con- spiracy within Google has had the paradox- ical effect of discouraging companies from properly policing their platforms, as they hesitate to remove content that should be removed for fear of unfounded criticism. In a visit to The Post after his hearing, Mr. Pichai said the moderation of misinforma- tion and domestic extremism on YouTube is an area where Google could improve. He also cautioned, fairly, that such actions must be weighed against the importance of free speech. The bias obsession has distracted from the more important subjects that Congress has failed to address these past two years. That seems likely to change when Demo- crats take control of the House in January. The first subject likely to draw more attention is privacy. Mr. Pichai was pressed to lay out, piece by piece, each treasure in the trove of information his company col- lects on consumers, from name to age to address to minute-by-minute location — mostly used for targeted advertising. Goo- gle has gotten ahead of the impending debate by signaling its support for a fed- eral privacy framework, but it’s up to law- makers to turn vague protection principles into meaningful policy. That means ensur- ing users know and have some say in what data companies are collecting from them, exactly what it is being used for and who else is getting to see it. Committee members also expressed interest in examining Google’s poten- tial anticompetitive behavior. The incom- ing chairman of the antitrust subcommittee, Rep. David N. Cicilline (D-R.I.), indicated his interest in “structural antitrust,” code for corporate breakups. But the broader appe- tite for so radical a move is probably lim- ited. Initially, Google seems more likely to face increased attention to charges that it systemically downranks local search results from its competitors. Finally, legislators lambasted Mr. Pichai over Project Dragonfly, Google’s explor- atory effort to launch a search engine in China. Mr. Pichai insisted time and time again that Google has “no plans” to re-en- ter the Chinese market, but he refused to rule out the possibility of a product that would aid in government repression and surveillance. These questions represent only a start at confronting Google’s role in society and how lawmakers might regulate it. Fewer minutes spent harping on bias allegations might have allowed time for further-reach- ing inquiries. Hopefully, that’s what the new year will bring. YOUR VIEWS Holiday donations becoming an expectation I wanted to comment about what has been going on in the grocery stores around here for the last seven weeks. When you get to the Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the East Oregonian editorial board. Other columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors and not necessarily that of the East Oregonian. checkout you are asked to round up to donate to the community. We live in a small com- munity and most are on a fixed income or poor. Asking people to round up at the checkout adds undue stress on people’s budget when they already have a tight budget, especially at this time of the year. We don’t think peo- ple should be pushed to donate at checkout every time you go to the store. What I found out is the checkers have to ask you to round up. They get in trouble if they don’t get donations. That is really wrong and so is asking every time you check out. My husband and I are on a fixed income. We donate to the food bank when we can afford to. I make hats, scarfs, and soap that we donate as well. Donating should be up to the individual. Lenore Moody Milton-Freewater The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public issues and public policies for publication in the newspaper and on our website. The newspaper reserves the right to withhold letters that address concerns about individual services and products or letters that infringe on the rights of private citizens. Letters must be signed by the author and include the city of residence and a daytime phone number. The phone number will not be published. Unsigned letters will not be published. Send letters to managing editor Daniel Wattenburger, 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 9780, or email editor@eastoregonian.com.