."

.\ .‘ £

The Cadre has heard many

complaints about the lack of campus news in the paper. However it seems that we have to be careful in run— ning what we do have. The Cadre has been attacked from all sides for last week's front page article, 'Cadre Mades Its Choices'. The com— plaint appears to be that we influenced voters directly, thus dEGiding for them their choice in the election. This has resulted in us being called power-mongers and ab— users of the power of the press, to put it simply the purveyors of some of the worst journalism ever seen.

‘The article was-published to act as an aid to under— stand the interviews which were run in the centre spread

and to show where we, as con—

cerned students stood. It was not intended to assure the election of the candida- tes we supported.

If the article did signi— ficantly influence the final outcome of the elections,‘ then there is a problem. How- ever the problem is not with the article or the paper, it‘ is with the members of our student union who would allow themselves to be led like so many sheep. -

Unfortunately, this situ- ation may in fact exist in today's university and in society as a whole. People as a whole put too much trust in the media and completely ac— cept what they are fed. If Lloyd Robertson says it, it's true.

Part of the problem is the complete stereotyping of dif— ferent newspapers (the comer-

cial press). For that reason,-

alternate newspapers are, with many struggles, appear- ing. The Cadre is a member of the Canadian University Press which sets, as a first prior: ity, offering students, and the public in general, an al— tenate to the commercial Dress. This is why the Cadre has printed articles such as the one on the Canadian Pap— erworkers Strike in Ontario. N0 establishment newspaper that I know of has guts en— ough to run a story like. that.

Another misgiving of the C0mmercial press (these are my opinions) is that it fails tO take a strong stand on any iSsues. Maybe this might threaten the control that they have on the public. By n0t taking stands they are able to subtly support their VieWpoint - and in manner t§at no forthright presenta- tlon 0f your position could eVer achieve. Presenting your arguements makes people think aboutryour position (and ho-

\

u

\

- )xl

The Cadre, February 24, 1976, page 5

WhattheHell IsrTh/e CadreIrying to ProVe?

pefully accept it thereafter) while presenting only the facts which support it with- out any arguementation makes them accept your position with thinking about it, ,out For example, if you wish to blame labour unrest on the workers, then talk to manage— ment about the problem and present only their views, If you'wish to support labour, then talk to them. Thus the news comes out biased - and

on the~basis of what we (or anyoneelse says? (If they did) Are elections not an utter farce if candidates are elected in the way that our

rcritics suggest?

If you do not think that

any of the above are suffi—

cient to tell why we acted as we did, then there is a letters to the editor column in which you may express your

views.

While our belief is that this action is justified, we would ask that if you do not agree with us, that you still stay with us in our struggle to keep the press free from outside interference. If the press does not agree with you,make it change. All you have to do is to join it.

Tony Reddin

all perfectly objectively (by, ‘Criticisms Laid at the Wrong Door

present standards)!

I I feel that taking a stand in a newsworthy conflict is very worthwhile (in fact, it is the only honest journal— ism) so long as the facts are not mis-represented..

Controversy means discus- sion and arguement, a worth- while product and one not seen enough at U.P.E.I.

Another problem with our article was that candidates we didn't choose might take it personally. We feel that, feelings shouldshave nothing

As a result of the.Cadre publishing it's choices of candidates in last week's is— sue, we recieved several com- plaints. These came from both candidates we picked and those we didn't. The former felt that we would lose them votes because we picked them (students being naturaly con- trary to anything) and the latter felt we would lose them votes because we didn't (students naturally being sheep).

For several reasons, I am

to do with an election, strange disappointed with this crit—

as this may seem in our popu- larity—controlled society. Also, if candidates are to run for public office, then they should be prepared for public evaluation and even criticism. ’

To: those candidates who feel ripped off\by our art— icle I say: Would you have wanted to be elected by the [type of sheep who would vote

'icism. Firstly, the idea that

students would vote one way or the other merely because we liked certain candidates- implies that students at U.- P.E.I. are a rather docile bunch of followers. How any— one so cynical could possibly run for office is beyond me. Even if U.P.E.I. students are influenced by our writing this lies with the students

not us. Surely those who cri— .ticised us for expressing our opinion would not say that our right to opinions should be abrogated because of a» possible weakness in the stu- dent body.

I suppose someone will ask.

'why our opinions should be

published. Well, we like stu— dents are not automatons. ‘ Despite working for a news— paper, we do have our opin- ions and since this is a pre- sumably free country with a presumably free press, then we presumably have the right to express them.

Now, we of the Cadre staff regret that any can— didates in the election

‘may have been hurt by our selections. There was no intent on our part to help or hurt any candidate.

Our choices may have been good or bad, but this is

cont. on page 11