Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 4, 1999)
EDITOR Erin Gibson OPINION EDITOR Cliff Hicks EDITORIAL BOARD Nancy Christensen Brad Davis Sam McKewon Jeff Randall Bret Schulte Our VIEW Right and reasonable Culture, education take priority over cuts Perhaps Minnesotans are now reaping the rewards of electing a former pro wrestler to govern their state. Gov. Jesse Ventura, who rode a wave of cynicism for traditional politicians to the state Capitol in November, unveiled plans last week to eliminate state funding for Minnesota public television and radio. Though the cut v/ould eliminate only 2 percent of Minnesota Public Radio’s budget, Ventura’s message is obvious: Culture - including MPR’s much beloved “A Prairie Home Companion” program - is not impor tant enough to be supported by state tax dol lars. Fortunately, the Nebraska state govern ment seems primed to buck the trend of penny-pinching at all costs. In his 1999-2000 executive budget, Gov. Mike Johanns recommended increasing state funding for the Nebraska Educational Telecommunications Division, the umbrella organization for services including public television and radio, as well as the state’s growing distance-education infrastructure. He proposed giving another $400,000 to the division’s budget, which would raise its annual state funding to $7.6 million - about one-third of its total operating budget. The division had asked for a $2.2 million increase but said it was pleased with the gov ernor’s support. jonanns also supported buying an essen tial $17 million public TV satellite transpon der and spending $41 million to phase in dig ital television over six years. The federal gov ernment requires all public television stations to broadcast in digital and analog, the Nebraska ETV Network’s current format, by May 1,2003. These blocks of spending will undoubted ly raise the ire of some traditionally tight-fist ed Nebraskans calling for tax cuts and ques tioning the importance of public broadcasting and distance education. The $58 million in technology update projects is sure to cause debate inside the Capitol walls, but the Daily Nebraskan hopes that legislators will bear in mind the impor tance of quality public programming. State senators should respect Johanns’ telecommunications budget recommenda tions and focus on Nebraskans’ cultural and educational needs, not just their pocketbooks. We hope our senators will understand the importance of public broadcasting and of dis tance education in a state where the miles between towns, their inhabitants and state educators can threaten cultural isolation and impede technological progress. For if Nebraskans, and the country, are to continue to enjoy NETV-produced programs such as “The Farmer’s Wife” - now ranked among the most important PBS documents of the decade - NETV must be fully funded. If not, some of the most important U.S. programming may be swept aside for the World Wrestling Federation. Editorial Policy Unsigned editorials are the opinions of the Spring 1999 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. Acolumn is solely the opinion of its author. The Board of Regents serves 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 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. Lenar Policy 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. Branch’s VIEW Tm 151% w - DN LETTERS Honorable intentions Several residence hall issues are not understood. The UNL campus is devot ed to diversity, as is the honors program. For that reason, special-interest floors have been created all over our campus, and campuses around the nation. Honors housing is just one of hundreds of these special-interest housing options. The goal of special-interest floors is self-explanatory: to create an environ ment where everyone feels some com mon interest. All of the non-honors stu dents currently in Neihardt will be able to live in Neihardt for a year and a half; however, they have the opportunity to apply to the program just like any other on campus student. The deadline is March 1. The honors program does not dis criminate on the basis of sex, age, dis ability, race, color, religion, marital sta tus, veteran’s status, national or ethnic origin or sexual orientation. Not every one who has stellar grades applies to the honors program, and not everyone in the program has a 4.00. Brian Opplinger’s point was that being in the honors program does not make you smart, but being informed does. Grades are not the only criterion for diversity. The Pound 9 and 10 repre sentatives seem to believe that diversity and segregation can be based upon GPA alone. The honors program contains members from all backgrounds and dis ciplines. Being in the program requires an application process just like any other honorary organization, and the textbook scholarship is, like its title implies, a scholarship. Anyone who holds a schol arship 6f any kind realizes that benefits and responsibilities exist to maintain it. Scholarships are decided on the basis of the people who apply and are awarded after a competitive process. Academic segregation, as some have chosen to call it, has always occurred. Universities are set up to dis tinguish people based on grades. Some people graduate based on the grades they have earned, and some people do not. The honors program is not set up to say that it includes all the smart people; it is set up to contain a portion of people who desire a certain path in their curriculum, much like choosing a major. The sociology department does not let a math major just have a sociology degree without doing the work or taking the classes, and the honors program does not admit any students who do not apply ...... Having never lived in Neihardt, I agree that some honors students will choose to and are capable of living else where. However, having special- inter est housing for the honors program is not any different than it is for any other types of special-interest housing. Crystal Lynn Keeler senior biology and sociology honors program undergraduate assistant The line is drawn As an author of a controversial Web site, one must follow certain guidelines in order to stay “within the bounds of the First Amendment.” After reading the story about the “anti-abortion terror ists,” I caff t help but think, “What the hell?” We are fortunate enough to be blessed with something so powerful as the First Amendment. But in order to use this right effectively, we must real ize. that our right is not absolute! One cannot go into a crowded the ater and yell “FIRE!” This would be in direct violation of every one else’s liberties. It absolutely bog gles me to hear Sk the defendants of this case believe their First Amendment rights are being violated. As soon as one uses their rights in a way that violates the rights of another, they no longer have the protection entrusted by the Constitution. If I were to put myself in the shoes of a doctor on this “anti-abor tion hit list,” I would be running scared, too. The Web can be a very powerful thing. Its power is easily abused in cases like this one. The question is: Where do we drawthe line? > I would consider the Web to fall under the qualifications of “freedom of press.” The problem is if we attack one slander case (as in the case of the anti abortion site), then it’s our duty to attack them all. If someone feels the need to publish a Web site that graphically slan ders myself with a headline of, “Marcus is a homosexual!” do I have the right to prosecute this individual for slander? Society and government need to reeval uate these types of cases. We could find ourselves swimming in a world of a government-controlled Internet if we aren’t careful. Right now the Internet is probably the most free form of ideas and communication. We also have to realize it’s the simplest to access. Exercise your rights... but remem ber (as my mother still says to me), “If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” Marcus Graham Lincoln resident MattHaney/DN