Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 2, 1997)
EDITOR Paula Lavigne OPINION JEDITOR Jessica Kennedy EDITORIAL BOARD Erin Gibson Joshua Gillin Jeff Randall Julie Sobczyk Ryan Soderlin Our VIEW Archway . 1 arguments Plans for structure cemented in absurdity The Gateway to the West it’s not. Ever since former Gov. Frank Morrison announced his intentions to build a $40 mil lion archway over Interstate 80 near Kearney, government agencies, architectural firms and Nebraska citizens alike have done little but scoff at the idea. And with what seems to be good reason. The Great Platte River Road Archway, as it is officially called, will be a 320-foot long span of steel, limestone and wood over one of the nation’s longest stretches of pavement. Proponents of the archway - most of whom are Morrison’s friends - all think the 14-story structure would beautify a rather desolate and jusi piam oonng segment oi me state. To Morrison’s credit, some positive senti ments have filtered in from commuters and motorists who regularly travel the flat expanse of cori|reteJcnown as Interstate 80. Gaudy or not, thirachway would leave some thing for driversti look forward to. And to quell any hot-under-the-collar tax payers, Morrison has been willing to raise the money for the project with the help of a foun dation headed by himself. Morrison plans to raise $35 million for the project, completing it by July 4,1999. Just in time for one of the biggest money making holidays of the year, of course. But is a poor man’s version of the St. Louis Gateway Arch, anchored by sculptures of an American Indian and a cowboy-like trailblazer, really what central Nebraska needs to spice things up? There are other ele ments to consider when deciding on a beauti fication project of this size, however. ine monument win oe in me center or what is affectionately known as “Tornado Alley,” a section of the state notorious for its hazardous weather conditions year-round. Imagine a 100-foot segment of steel and stone crashing down on the interstate. So much for beautification then. Also, when it snows in the pancake-flat Platte Valley, drifts tend to appear against anything taller than 3 feet high. What would drifts be like against a structure standing more than 140 feet high? Then there^ the time and money that will be sunk into the project. Although no state money will be used for the construction or maintenance of die structure, structures for higher learning are crumbling left and right on this very cam pus. IfMorrison really wants to help the state, he should put up the money to keep Richards Hall from sinking into the ground. And after all the fighting over air rights and groundbreaking, after the arch is cement ed into place two years from now, how long will it stand? Surety not as long as any sort of solid, inner-city community improvement project would. Even though this state is small, it has its share of problems. And no amount of con crete and steel will fix them. uiiunai roiicy Unsigned editorials are the opinions of the Fan 1997 Daily Nebraskan. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, its employees, its student body or the University of Nebraska Board of Regents. A column is solely the opinion of its author. The Board of Regents serve as publisher of the Daily Nebraskan; policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. The UNL Publications Board, established by the regents, supervises the production r of the paper. According to policy set by the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of its student employees. ; ..- J Latter PtHcy The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor and guest columns, but does not guarantee their publication. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject any material submitted. Submitted material becomes property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned. Anonymous submissions will not be published. Those who submit letters must identify themselves by name, year in school, major and/or group affiliation, if any. Submit material to: Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St. Lincoln, NE. 68588-0448. E-mail: letters@unlinfo.unl.edu. Haney’s VIEW . We fett A1 im omM No* Beuete VMHe/wmj ,TT toJLWWT pot U#« Y«*v (jM CrtW&WeM WE> tOCrtW PC4CM6-. \s \iHue** m<n£ Bey<»® pmolV ^CtWlaMSHlPS 4® IN Mi 5*APVIW £j6lM6 sn^'^rtT J ) J Mum’s the problem Protecting Chelsea’s privacy infringes upon others "SHE"" : : * I LL ww ... (Oxfeld) should have been able to comment on Chelsea s arrival for the simple fact that she is — like it or not — a public figure” KAY PRAUNER is a senior news-editorial major, the assistant copy desk chief and a Daily Nebraskan columnist. This week a student columnist was fired for using a profanity in one of his expositions. His editor’s decision to fire him was lauded by the university, and may have even set precedence for media actions across the nation. But when Jesse Oxfeld of the Stanford Daily mentioned the “C wuru, mai is, i^neisea bullion ana her debut on Stanford University’s campus, he meant no harm. He merely alluded to the fact that her privacy was equally as important as the privacy of other university stu dents when he mentioned two gripes about die Daily’s rather opaque “no Chelsea” policy: That the rule meant journalists “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” (or, in other words, don’t do their jobs), and that both the university and the White House made such an outlandish display of Chelsea’s arrival - complete with ma, pa and hundreds of security offi cials donning dark glasses and leer ing suspiciously at every student in sight - that the efforts to ensure her privacy had kept other students from their own privacy. Oxfeld’s column included nothing offensive, nothing radical, nothing harmful, nothing libelous, nothing unfair. Even so, Editor in Chief Carolyn I...“... Sleeth said Oxfeld was in strict vio lation of her adamantly enforced “no-Chelsea” rule, and thus violated his duties as a weekly columnist. Beneath this rule, Chelsea’s name could be mentioned only if she were involved in what was deemed a “newsworthy event.” And, according to Sleeth, Chelsea’s arrival did not fall under the “newsworthiness” Cat egory. So when Oxfeld refused to submit a rewrite, he was fired. So how far, exactly, must this policy span? In an interview with ABC News, Oxfeld said, “The blan kci policy mat we win not cover (Chelsea) springs from a good motive, but this has been taken to a ... degree where you can’t mention her name.” Certainly, Oxfeld blatantly disre garded his editor’s instructions; but he should have been able to com ment on Chelsea’s arrival for the simple fact that she is - like it.or not - a public figure. The entourage that surrounded Chelsea on moving-in day clearly pointed to her celebrity status, and this was exactly Oxfeld’s point. No other Stanford student arrived with such flamboyance; no other student pulled up with a platoon of body guards. Of course Bill and Hillary want their daughter to have as “normal” a college experience as any other young adult. And I’m sure the only child of die most powerful man in the world wants nothing more than to have some shred of normalcy in her life. Having grown up the governor’s daughter, Chelsea has never been out of the spotlight; yet this familiarity would never protect her from the glare. For even Chelsea’s delibera tion about which university to attend made the evening news for months. But what average Stanford stu dent could ignore the fact that a Secret Service agent sits in on Chelsea’s Composition 101, or that men in dark glasses perpetually sit within earshot as she’s having dinner with friends in the cafeteria? Albeit through no tault ot her own, when Chelsea arrived, she did disrupt the standard student’s activi ties on Stanford’s campus. And similarly, through no fault of her own, Chelseais a public figure, a status that under any circumstance should permit the media to cover her actions - so long as coverage of pub lic figures remains one of die fore most tenets of the First Amendment. As of right now, the media’s priv ilege to covet public f gures remains; and beneath this privilege, Jesse Oxfeld should have been allowed to rem ' is well. as for the Stanford Daily, protect Chelsea’s privacy, please, but don’t allow her presence to pervade the rights of other students or staff - for such actions will detract from their own “normal” university expe riences. . ......—--1 '.;j fc: ’ - J 1 I ... —---—««« *W* ' '“'"■uu. j