2008 Woodie Awards
Letters to the editor
Issue date: 8/31/07 Section: Editorials
Advertisement stickers affect newspaper's credibility
I am e-mailing to express my discontent over The Miami Student's decision to place sticker ads on our newspaper. The Huron Consulting ad placed on the newspaper in the Aug. 28, 2007 was unnecessary and and frankly ridiculous. What happened to the time when a company would place an ad inside the paper? Now we have to physically remove a sticker ad just to read the paper? This type of advertisement should not be a revenue source for The Miami Student. Pretty soon every article will be covered
by a sticker ad, simply because The Miami Student wanted an easy source of revenue.
No self-respecting paper has ever lowered itself to placing ads on its paper. Readers should be able to pick up a paper and begin reading, not worry about taking off advertisements just to read the headlines. Advertisements deserve a place in the paper, and that is understandable. Any self-sustaining newspaper and reader can accept that fact. While reading the paper they will bear witness to advertisements throughout its pages. But placing advertisements on your newspaper is distracting and disrespectful. I could not believe that I had to physically remove an advertisement just to read the paper.
I am curious as to what rationale and reasoning was used to accept the decision to use sticker ads. It undermines the credibility of the students and especially the sincerity of your newspaper. Thank you for your time and I urge you and your staff to discuss the issue of sticker ads
and its affect on the credibility of
your newspaper.
Josh Zeidman
zeidmajd@muohio.edu
Potential smoking ban raises too many questions
With regard to President David Hodge's approval of a smoking ban, I can't help but wonder several things. First, what will be the impact on smokers who decide to continue smoking? What consequences will students, faculty, and staff face for non-compliance? Will parents of students visiting campus be fined or arrested if they smoke? Also, who will enforce this new dictate? University police cannot restrain an adult for making a completely legal lifestyle choice.
Second, why the sudden focus on smoking as a university problem, anyway? The number of reckless drivers is a much more immediate threat to the safety of university students and personnel than smokers. Additionally, alcohol continues to be a major problem on campus; why not pour the funds from this anti-smoking decree into finding a solution for underage and excessive drinking? And where are the funds for the smoking cessation programs coming from?
Money for a "free" program must come from somewhere.
Finally, according a Miami news release dated Aug. 27, "Hodge cited numerous studies finding that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollution." Indoor air pollution is not even part of the issue. Ohio law already forbids smoking inside public places. Why should this even enter the argument for going smoke-free out-of-doors on Miami campuses?
The ad-hoc committee, university senate, and President Hodge should weigh these concerns more carefully before implementing their plan, lest it be doomed to failure from the start.
Meg Anderson
andersm1@muohio.edu
Sexism predominates DormAid promotion
When I first turned the page to Cassidy Pazyniak's article on DormAid, the first thing I noticed was the photo. There were seven smiling white young adults, two males and five females. I immediately wondered why the men in the picture wore T-shirts and the women wore tight tank tops. Two of the women were facing each other with their breasts sticking out, touching each other. Yes, they want to catch the eye of college students, but really? Then I started reading ... In their "Play Hard" tips, they suggest that a male student should not reveal if he is a freshman, but a female student should. This tells female students they are supposed to make themselves appear naive in a dating situation, while males are supposed to appear experienced. They also advise female students to establish a buddy system. This is a smart and necessary choice in terms of safety, but their reasoning is so "no one gets stuck dancing with 'that guy'." How about telling "that guy" to his face that you don't want to dance instead of relying on a friend to pull you away? Whenever sexism in advertising is criticized, there always seems to be someone to point out, "Well, sex sells." Yes, sex sells. But instead of relying on the easy way out, why aren't companies putting in the extra effort to create an ad that isn't so typical and easy?
Louisa Versaw
versawlc@muohio.edu
Students, profs should stand against alcohol abuse at MU
I'm writing in response to article concerning the possible prosecution of the friends who may have encouraged behavior that led to the death of a friend this past year. Any death related to alcohol is one death too many. One could argue that you can't punish everyone else for the irresponsibility of a few. If prosecuting the enablers saves one more life, then it's justified. Does this mean a person is not responsible for his or her own actions? No. Every person is fully responsible for themselves. But individuals should also be held accountable should their actions lead to another person's harm-even if it was unintentional. Just because a person is 21 does not make that person responsible. In fact, I will go out on a limb and say that most people who drink on this campus are irresponsible when it comes to alcohol. Students drink for the wrong reasons and engage in risky behavior and no one holds them immediately accountable except for law enforcement. The attitude on this campus is if a person is 21 that person is an adult and can make their own decisions and therefore no one has the right to tell that person otherwise. It's often forgotten that for many students the only other contact besides friends that students have is professors. Too often professors' attitudes about alcohol are not all that different from the attitudes of the students. Those professors who are concerned about a student's behavior are unlikely to say anything to the student, because a discussion about alcohol may turn into a discussion about values, morals, or any of that other stuff that might be connected with the politically incorrect words "religion" or "Christianity" or "Bible" which spells out right and wrong and makes it quite clear that the "anything goes" philosophy of students and so many others is wrong. I can only hope that there are more professors on this campus who would care enough to take stand against some of the irresponsible and dangerous behavior that students become involved in. The problem of alcohol is not just a student problem-it's part of the culture at this university and the attitudes and behavior of the students will not change if all else remains unchanged.
Amanda Lauck
lauckam@muohio.edu
I am e-mailing to express my discontent over The Miami Student's decision to place sticker ads on our newspaper. The Huron Consulting ad placed on the newspaper in the Aug. 28, 2007 was unnecessary and and frankly ridiculous. What happened to the time when a company would place an ad inside the paper? Now we have to physically remove a sticker ad just to read the paper? This type of advertisement should not be a revenue source for The Miami Student. Pretty soon every article will be covered
by a sticker ad, simply because The Miami Student wanted an easy source of revenue.
No self-respecting paper has ever lowered itself to placing ads on its paper. Readers should be able to pick up a paper and begin reading, not worry about taking off advertisements just to read the headlines. Advertisements deserve a place in the paper, and that is understandable. Any self-sustaining newspaper and reader can accept that fact. While reading the paper they will bear witness to advertisements throughout its pages. But placing advertisements on your newspaper is distracting and disrespectful. I could not believe that I had to physically remove an advertisement just to read the paper.
I am curious as to what rationale and reasoning was used to accept the decision to use sticker ads. It undermines the credibility of the students and especially the sincerity of your newspaper. Thank you for your time and I urge you and your staff to discuss the issue of sticker ads
and its affect on the credibility of
your newspaper.
Josh Zeidman
zeidmajd@muohio.edu
Potential smoking ban raises too many questions
With regard to President David Hodge's approval of a smoking ban, I can't help but wonder several things. First, what will be the impact on smokers who decide to continue smoking? What consequences will students, faculty, and staff face for non-compliance? Will parents of students visiting campus be fined or arrested if they smoke? Also, who will enforce this new dictate? University police cannot restrain an adult for making a completely legal lifestyle choice.
Second, why the sudden focus on smoking as a university problem, anyway? The number of reckless drivers is a much more immediate threat to the safety of university students and personnel than smokers. Additionally, alcohol continues to be a major problem on campus; why not pour the funds from this anti-smoking decree into finding a solution for underage and excessive drinking? And where are the funds for the smoking cessation programs coming from?
Money for a "free" program must come from somewhere.
Finally, according a Miami news release dated Aug. 27, "Hodge cited numerous studies finding that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollution." Indoor air pollution is not even part of the issue. Ohio law already forbids smoking inside public places. Why should this even enter the argument for going smoke-free out-of-doors on Miami campuses?
The ad-hoc committee, university senate, and President Hodge should weigh these concerns more carefully before implementing their plan, lest it be doomed to failure from the start.
Meg Anderson
andersm1@muohio.edu
Sexism predominates DormAid promotion
When I first turned the page to Cassidy Pazyniak's article on DormAid, the first thing I noticed was the photo. There were seven smiling white young adults, two males and five females. I immediately wondered why the men in the picture wore T-shirts and the women wore tight tank tops. Two of the women were facing each other with their breasts sticking out, touching each other. Yes, they want to catch the eye of college students, but really? Then I started reading ... In their "Play Hard" tips, they suggest that a male student should not reveal if he is a freshman, but a female student should. This tells female students they are supposed to make themselves appear naive in a dating situation, while males are supposed to appear experienced. They also advise female students to establish a buddy system. This is a smart and necessary choice in terms of safety, but their reasoning is so "no one gets stuck dancing with 'that guy'." How about telling "that guy" to his face that you don't want to dance instead of relying on a friend to pull you away? Whenever sexism in advertising is criticized, there always seems to be someone to point out, "Well, sex sells." Yes, sex sells. But instead of relying on the easy way out, why aren't companies putting in the extra effort to create an ad that isn't so typical and easy?
Louisa Versaw
versawlc@muohio.edu
Students, profs should stand against alcohol abuse at MU
I'm writing in response to article concerning the possible prosecution of the friends who may have encouraged behavior that led to the death of a friend this past year. Any death related to alcohol is one death too many. One could argue that you can't punish everyone else for the irresponsibility of a few. If prosecuting the enablers saves one more life, then it's justified. Does this mean a person is not responsible for his or her own actions? No. Every person is fully responsible for themselves. But individuals should also be held accountable should their actions lead to another person's harm-even if it was unintentional. Just because a person is 21 does not make that person responsible. In fact, I will go out on a limb and say that most people who drink on this campus are irresponsible when it comes to alcohol. Students drink for the wrong reasons and engage in risky behavior and no one holds them immediately accountable except for law enforcement. The attitude on this campus is if a person is 21 that person is an adult and can make their own decisions and therefore no one has the right to tell that person otherwise. It's often forgotten that for many students the only other contact besides friends that students have is professors. Too often professors' attitudes about alcohol are not all that different from the attitudes of the students. Those professors who are concerned about a student's behavior are unlikely to say anything to the student, because a discussion about alcohol may turn into a discussion about values, morals, or any of that other stuff that might be connected with the politically incorrect words "religion" or "Christianity" or "Bible" which spells out right and wrong and makes it quite clear that the "anything goes" philosophy of students and so many others is wrong. I can only hope that there are more professors on this campus who would care enough to take stand against some of the irresponsible and dangerous behavior that students become involved in. The problem of alcohol is not just a student problem-it's part of the culture at this university and the attitudes and behavior of the students will not change if all else remains unchanged.
Amanda Lauck
lauckam@muohio.edu
Be the first to comment on this story