Page 19


The Missouri set up I noted in your most recent issue that the Regents are considering restructuring the University of Texas Journalism Department and The Daily Texan along the lines of the system used at the University of Missouri. As a former editor-in-chief of the student newspaper at the University of Missouri, I would like to clear up some apparent misconceptions by Mr. Erwin as to what actually exists at Missouri. The University of Missouri has two newspapers the Columbia Missourian \(a town newspaper edited by faculty the Maneater \(a student newspaper entirely Missourian is a lab newspaper in the sense that journalism students write the stories under the supervision of faculty members. It covers national, international and local city news and almost no campus news. It is, in fact, in direct competition with Columbia’s other city daily, the Columbia Tribune a fact much resented by free enterprise types in the state of Missouri since the Missourian is underwritten by the state government. I doubt seriously if the Austin daily papers would permit the state of Texas to finance direct competition. The Maneater \(as in maneating tiger, the entirely student written and student edited. The editor is selected by a student-faculty committee but the committee and the school administration exercise no day-to-day supervision over the publication. The Maneater covers primarily campus news and receives soine form of 16 The Texas Observer IDialogue subsidy from student activities fees. In many respects, the Maneater is comparable to the current operation of the Texan except that no journalism credit is offered for working on it. There certainly is nothing objectionable to the pure Missouri system a town lab newspaper operated by the School of Journalism and a separate, independent student newspaper with the latter being the only real campus newspaper. However a bastardized version which would produce only one newspaper under the control of the school administration or a lab newspaper for the campus in competition with a second campus newspaper makes no sense and has no relationship to what actually exists at the University of Missouri. Martin Frost, Dallas, Tex. , No ‘DT’ he Although I appreciate being called “irrepressibly cheerful,” I prefer not to be grouped with the “dirty thirty.” The chief reason for this preference is that they both singly and as a group are traditionally unsuccessful in their endeavors. Perhaps my cheerfulness is resultant from my fortunate success in the past and my belief, with all reason for same, that my present principal endeavor will be successful. Rep. Bill Finck, P.O. Box 2910, Austin, Tex. 78767. Parker’s record Re: Carl Parker’s recent blistering by TO what can you expect from a state rep who has a 28-2 favorable voting record with the Observer. . . . Now come on! Betty Brink, 2255 Harrison, Beaumont, Tex. 77701. That was last session. Ed. Cally and the Senate I would like to commend you on your article concerning the resolution passed by the Texas Senate asking pardon for Lieutenant Calley. I would like to point out that the sponsors of this little jewel of legislative idiocy forgot to mention that under the Uniform Code of Military Justice there is a section on “Lawful Orders.” This section not only gave Lieutenant Calley an alternative to killing the people of My Lai, if, as he states, these were his orders but made it his duty not to follow them. All members of the armed forces have to learn the U.C.M.J., so Lieutenant Calley was well aware of this. The sponsors of this resolution defending the actions of Lieutenant Calley should have investigated the issue more thoroughly, but it seems evident they looked no further than their nose, which is a usual characteristic for most members of the Texas Senate. David Prasifka, 7500 Bluff Springs Rd., Box 50, Austin,,Tex. 78744. Ashamed I was appalled and ashamed that so many of our illustrious lawmakers voted for the Calley resolution. That poor fellow needs medical attention, not hero worship. Are our standards and morals now on a par with those of Nazi Germany? ‘ Mrs. J. N. Rayzor, 3207 Groveland Lane, Houston, Tex. 77019. Preventing cancer U.S. Sen. Thomas Eagleton says that if present trends continue, one out of four Americans will get cancer and 34 million will die from it. The early detection of cancer and the search for a cure are noble goals and worthy of support. However, I wonder why the American Cancer Society does not put more emphasis on the prevention of cancer. Why are we not told of the value of proper nutrition in preventing cancer? Adelle Davis says that animals on a stock diet of natural foods resist cancer. Yet every year Americans are consuming more processed and refined foods. Why are known carcinogens such as the synthetic hormone diethyl-stilbestrol \(used supply? Cancer is many diseases with many causes; but surely the removal of as many environmental carcinogens as possible would greatly reduce the incidence of cancer. A letter to Sen. Abraham Ribicoff, Senate Office Bldg., Washington, D.C. 20510, asking for safe food additives would be helpful. He is now conducting hearings on “Chemicals and the Future of Man.” Mrs. John H. Hicks, 2305 Wilke Dr., Austin, Tex. 78704.