CAPTITAL TIMES, October 26, 1990
This summer Temple University banned three photographs taken by
Cecil Brooks, a PSH graduate and professional artist, because many
students felt the nude pictures exploited women. Art experts ruled that
the photos are not obscene, and Temple received an abundance of
attention from the local art community--carrying a "censor" label into the
next few months.
The Capital Times editors decided not to publish these photographs
with the article on Brooks and his work for reasons of appropriateness--
and not as an act of censorship--although the reporter and artist wanted
readers to view his work with the article.
Censorship has become a far too common practice at many educational
institutions, causing controversy nation-wide. However, the Cap Times
editors must exercise good judgment and common sense when deciding
which photographs and articles to publish.
The photos are simply not suitable for a newspaper—regardlesS of
whether the photos are in fact art or pornography. We are not art critics,
and are not trying to be. We are editors who make journalistic decisions
about the appropriateness of photos and articles for the newspaper.
The general audience's reaction to seeing photographs of nude women
in the Cap Times ranges from one extreme to the other. Many readers
would see art and many would see pornography--a definite conflict of
interest.
Photographs may need to tell an entire story since most people spend
only 15-20 minutes per day reading a newspaper. Most readers only
glance through newspapers to read important headlines and leads, scan
news stories and features, look at photos and read the captions.
Therefore, one example of Brooks' work does not do justice for an
article about the artist and his work--especially if the example can be
misinterpreted.
Some readers would only see the nude photograph and not read the
copy, which is an essential part to understanding the photos. Viewing
the pictures before reading the copy might turn away readers that would
be otherwise receptive if they knew some background information first.
Our job is to report the news in an unbiased and professional manner.
We gave our readers a complete article about Brooks and his work
without publishing the controversial photographs that may (or may not)
offend our audience. Controversy doesn't frighten us but offending our
audience does. If even a small portion of our audience became offended
by the photos and stopped reading the Cap Times, we would have failed
in our goals.
The Capital Times reports the news; we give you the facts and let you
form your own opinions. Publishing the nude photos, would give you
the facts plus a sample of the artwork. But, at the same time, we shove
controversial photos down the throats of readers who may see
pornography and not art.
Since the Cap Times decided not to publish the photos, why not
display them in the Gallery Lounge? We gave you the background
information so you can then decide whether you want to view the
photos. In this case, YOU make the choice! Art should be taken in
slowly with time for understanding and digestion--if you choose to view
it--and not forced down your throat.
Letters to the editor are always
welcomed and encouraged.
Submit your letter in Room W-341 or place it in our
mailbox in Room 212. Typed submissions are
preferred. Please include your name...we cannot print
anonymous letters.
Nude Photos Deemed
Improper for Newspaper
Victoria, Cuscitw
Editor-in-Chief
OPINIONS
Did Meade Heights Forget
Earth Day?
To the Editor:
Earth Day, 1990...ahh, I remember it
well. A whole day filled with planting
trees, creating a giant sculpture with
recycled cans, music, dance, the main
lobby rain forest, and the many
wonderful talks on what we can do to
save our precious environment.
The enthusiasm of that spring day has
echoed through the halls of PSH, but
never seemed to reach Meade Heights.
This letter was going to bash the PSH
administration for lack of following their
own good advice--namely recycling. But
just as I was putting pen to paper, I saw
the large white bins displaying that
distinct three turned arrow symbol
sprouting up in the Olmsted building.
Yes, PSH had finally started to recycle
cans and paper.
But what of Meade Heights? Here we
have a community of respectable size
that still throws out cans, bottles, and
newspapers (except for a select few who
have taken it upon themselves to
*************************************************************
CAPITAL TIMES STAFF MEETINGS: Please plan to
4c
attend a meeting on Monday, October 29 at 10:00 a.m. or on:
t, Tuesday, October 30 at 12:30 p.m. in the office. Attendance
* to one of these meetings is mandatory. If you cannot attend,
please contact Vicki or Jon!
41
4c 41
',4ll444*******************************************************44l
recycle--good work).
Mandatory recycling has become an
issue, and usually a law, in many of the
counties throughout Pennsylvania. Now
comes the riddle. Why isn't PSH, which
was once the mecca of Earth Day 1990,
leading the way for Dauphin County by
mandatory household recycling in the
Heights?
Those who do recycle up here must
deal with the smell, mess, and many
times bugs while storing up enough
recyclable materials until it's worth a
trip to a northern Harrisburg recycling
facility. How much easier it would be to
have those items sitting around only
until the weekly pickup.
Imagine a whole campus putting their
money (or more accurately-effort) where
their mouth is. Imagine the future
leaders of our community actually
preserving that community. Realize the
dream—RECYCLE!
Rich Chiavetta