Letters to the Editor

Ticket price hike is not Berenson's fault

To the Daily:

I just wanted to respond to the Berenson bashers out there. While nobody likes the hockey ticket increase, it sure as hell isn't Red's fault. Decisions like that are above him, and it is his job to work within those parameters. What's a shame is that his true sentiments on the handling of the situation didn't come through in the Daily's story. In his letter to Dekers club members, he commented on how it's a shame that the Athletic Department decided to do the price increase all at once. It would have been much less infuriating if they had increased the price incrementally over a few years. What's true is that we're paying an average price now. Michigan State hockey tickets cost as much as $12 a game, and they can't even win a championship, let alone two in recent years!

I'm not happy about this any more than the next guy, but I will definitely say that this program is worth it and am proud to have my seats for this season.

Josh Keough

School of Architecture and Urban Planning

A proposal to make GEO fair

To the Daily:

Eric Dirnbach's attack on me and defense of the GEO ("GEO Stands for GSIs' rights," 10/5/98) requires immediate correction. Dirnbach assumes that I have no understanding of the benefits that I get "from the union."

My two children were born here, so I am very familiar with the health and other benefits that GSIs have. But I dispute his claim that the GEO is responsible for those benefits. Four of five graduate programs I was accepted at had the same or similar benefits without unions. That is a factor of the program I chose, not the university or union. GEO cannot claim credit for getting me benefits I would get anyway.

I acknowledge that the union is my negotiating agent with the University and am not asking for a free ride. My complaint is that the remuneration is unfair and excessive. I don't know the actual percentages that the union spends on various activities. It is certainly spending a lot of my money on things I don't want to be a part of, such as membership in two or three national unions, donations to political parties or candidates and beer parties. Dirnbach said he is not interested in these issues, but I am. Would he like it if I took his money and forced him to donate to some cause he doesn't agree with?

My suggestion would be to set the representation fee at a percentage (perhaps 25 percent) of the union dues. If you want to be in the union, with all that includes, you can join the union. If all you want is to be represented in negotiations with the University, you can pay the reduced representation fee. That is fair.

I think my proposal could actually lead to a stronger union. If everyone who joined the union actually wanted to be in the union, the union is in a better a position for their strikes and days of action. But most importantly my proposal gives GSIs the freedom to choose if they want to be involved or not.

Steven Clarke

Rackham

Cash should be punished for his inaction

To the Daily:

In reading the viewpoint of Sept. 30, "Berkeley wants student to get out of town," I was utterly shocked and appalled that David Cash had apparently no conscience to stop what he was witnessing. What is wrong with people today when a 7-year-old girl is being raped to death by a college student, and his friend does nothing? When this little girl is dead, and Cash is only concerned about his reputation and enrollment at Berkeley, I think that something needs to be done. Expulsion is not enough. Not only did Cash not say anything, but he watched it happen and didn't even try to stop his friend. I cannot believe that he even has the gall to brag about making money off of this incident, or that he feels the need to call a local radio station and compare this incident with the plight of starving children in Panama. Hopefully, we can all try to realize when our fellow man is in danger and intervene.

Christopher DeVries

LSA sophomore

Viewpoint was damaging to efforts for peace

To the Daily:

I am writing in response to the viewpoint printed on Oct. 5, "Daily ignores Israeli violations." I am dismayed that the Daily would print an article containing language that seems to call for violence. A newspaper's editorial page should serve as a public arena to exchange views through fair and accurate information.

It should not be a place to use provocative language. The words chosen by the author stimulate hostile emotions in the hearts of all sides. "Fighting words" are not a means of exchanging views or registering a protest; they are directed against individuals or groups to provoke violence. Using inciting terms is like yelling fire in a crowded building.

Specifically, I object to the use of terms that refer to the Israeli army as "machine-gun-toting racists" and the comparison of the Holocaust with the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. While I recognize the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle for justice, it is historically inaccurate and an affront to morality to compare Palestinian hardships to the Holocaust. For the Daily to permit its esteemed pages to be used for such propaganda defies understanding. Hitler presided over the systematic destruction of six million Jews. Nothing that the government of Israel has done to the Palestinians remotely approaches the Holocaust.

The issue addressed in this viewpoint - the Daily's lack of coverage of this group's recent event - may be a valid complaint. But coupling that complaint with a cacophony of unfounded allegations stated in fighting language only makes the situation worse. I am not saying that the Palestinian people have not suffered, they surely have. But no good will come out of situation until the name-calling ends and fair and honest dialogue begins.

It is time to stop the name-calling and start dealing with the challenging issues that divide each side. I call on both sides to stop using the Daily's editorial page as a forum to file grievances against one another.

Instead, let us sit down, examine the facts, and draw informed conclusions about the situation.

Micah Peltz

LSA sophomore

Daily should not use the word 'victim'

To the Daily:

Daily staff reporter Katie Plona uses the word "victim" 19 times in her Oct. 2 article ("Brooks sanctioned under Code"). Although this term may be Daily policy, it is degrading and unacceptable and perpetuates violence against women.

The woman mentioned is not a victim, she is a survivor. "Victim" implies passivity, and although the definition of "one who is injured" may apply, the 19 repetitions bombard the reader with images of helplessness and lack of action.

The Daily should not affirm this message; by reinforcing the notion of the weak "victim," all women are hurt. Clearly this survivor is neither passive nor lacking strength - she is courageously seeking adequate punishment for her assailant, and rightfully so. The Daily must recognize its responsibility as an unbiased media source and break the tradition of inequity and sexism in news coverage.

Please don't dismiss this as a petty criticism - surely the Daily recognizes the power of a single word.

Cheryl Bratt

LSA sophomore

10-07-98