I've been considering applying for the position of Ombudsman at the Daily Californian. The job is defined as

a government appointee who investigates complaints by private persons against the government

Presumably I would be in charge of criticizing the Daily Cal's news coverage, corrections policy, etc. Technically the job is called the 'Readers Representative,' which is a silly phrase when applied to Berkeley. To successfully represent all readers the job holder would have to complain about both the Daily Cal's obvious liberal bias and its disdain for minorities. 'Ombudsman' is a better word for the precarious position of the job-- both a part of the Daily Cal and outside of it.

I have very little qualifications to criticize the Daily Cal well. Granted I've spent nearly two years bitching about this or that. But I have only one actual article to my credit-- one where most of the actual fact-checking and writing was done by my Editor, Emma Schwartz. There's also the fact that the biggest problem the Daily Cal faces is its abysmal relationship with minority and Progressive groups. I have very few ties to either.

So I drafted most of a sample column. I've had this idea kicking around for awhile. I don't know if it'd work, but it might be worth a shot. I'm edgy about it because of the huge amount of assumptions I threw in.

The Daily Cal gets in trouble approximately once a year for something within its pages construed as racism, primarily by progressive groups and minority rights activists. Last year this was a cartoon parodying North Korean Dictator Kim Jong II and an article naming a Black football player as an alleged criminal. The year prior it was a cartoon just following September 11th about Muslim hijackers in hell. The biggest furor was the year before that, when David Horowitz ran a full-page ad condemning slavery reparations. Typically the protests involve surrounding the Daily Cal or occupying their offices, calling for an apology and editorial changes. When I say typically I mean 'invariably.'

There has been no improvement in race relations following these incidents and there never will be if the pattern continues. The philosophies and motivations are simply too different. Broadly speaking, the Activists want the Daily Cal to allow some form of editorial oversight by the local community, make good faith efforts to represent underrepresented minorities, and add a code of ethics. The Daily Californian staff already uses the journalist code of ethics, which requires editorial independence. This is fundamentally opposed to the notion of 'responsibility to the community.'

Without getting into which side is correct, there will never be any compromise between the two sides. For the Daily Cal to compromise on their Editorial independence means they will not be respected as Journalists by any of the major papers they hope to work for some day. In other words, if they apologize, all they are is admitted racists who apologized for it. Who wants that? For the activists to compromise would require giving up the idea of community control over its media, the central tenet of their complaints. Indeed, some would argue that both sides benefit from this lack of compromise. The Journalists look like they're standing up for free speech and independence. The Activists look like they're working to prevent racism in the community.

We'll all be happier when both sides understand the unproductive cycle they've locked themselves into and look past it. There are strategies that can improve race relations between the Daily Cal and underrepresented groups.

The best idea I've heard is to build a productive relationship between the Daily Cal and the activist journalists that make up the lesser-known Berkeley newspapers. These are Onyx Express, the African-American paper, Hardboiled, the Progressive Asian paper, Al-Bayan, the Muslim (Arabic?) paper, and La Voz, the Latino (Hispanic?) paper. The Daily Cal doesn't cover underrepresented groups very well primarily because it has very few reporters with ties to those groups. So strike a deal. The Daily Cal gets to broaden its coverage and reporting pool by drawing upon those reporters. The activist papers get vastly expanded distribution of their stories and attention drawn to their own work. It's similar to the syndication deals that all papers use nationwide-- as in when you see a New York Times article in the Chronicle.

(Address how to handle the touchy issues of rewrites? Boiling out bias? Or simply gloss over it as 'negotiations will address how to...?')

Email This Post!

BEARS WIN INSIGHT BOWL 52-49



[recap]
[photos]

With thousands of Cal fans roaring in Phoenix, Arizona, the California Golden Bears were victorious over the Virginia Tech Hokies in a wild 1000+ yard offensive shootout.

Down early 21-7, Cal came back to score 6 consecutive touchdowns, and Aaron Rodgers put on an aerial show. Rodgers threw for a career high 394 yards on 27-35 passing and scored 4 TDs, 2 passing and 2 running. It was his 5th 300+ yard game this season, tying a school record.

Both teams led by as many as 14, but fierce rallies from each side led to a 49-49 tie, resulting in Tyler Fredrickson hitting the game winning 35-yard field goal as time expired.

The combined score of 101 is a new record for the 15-year-old Insight Bowl.Email This Post!

Word on the street is that the University decided not to expand the scope and benefits of the Regent Scholar program. They had considered a range of ideas, including

The proposal would give next year’s scholars priority registration, guaranteed first-choice housing and a $1,500 research grant.

This all was to make the Regent Scholarship more competitive with similar 'top student' scholarships at other Universities. It was apparently shot down due to lack of funds. Email This Post!

Governor Schwarzenegger ordered $30 million more in cuts from UC yesterday.

The mid-year cuts for UC as announced by the governor today include:

• An unallocated reduction of $15.7 million.

• A reduction of $12.2 million for K-12 outreach programs.

• A reduction of $2 million for the Institute for Labor and Employment.

Email This Post!

Berkeley released their figures for the fall class-- virtually unchanged from last year.

Of the 3,600 students who started their freshman year at UC Berkeley this fall, 45 percent identify themselves as Asian-American, 4 percent as African-American, 11 percent as Hispanic, 30 percent as white and 0.5 percent as American Indian or Native Alaskan. The proportions for last year's entering class of 3,655 students were almost identical, though 29 percent of its members were white and 0.4 percent identified themselves as Native American.

These are remarkably steady numbers-- perhaps too steady, given that California is constantly undergoing demographic shifts. You would expect some of that to be reflected in the numbers year by year. Look forward to the upcoming LA Times piece: 'Admissions hold steady: a University in crisis.' as well as 'White figures increase 1 percent: a University in crisis.'

It's also interesting that these numbers are steady despite the fee increases over the summer. You might expect groups correlated with lower socioeconomic figures to show a drop-- but that apparently hasn't happened.

Email This Post!

Bear in Mind

Oddly enough, I've never met Chancellor Berdahl. Indeed, meeting the Chancellor is the one thing on my entire four-year to-do list that I've never managed to accomplish. It's not very high on that list, but it would be nice to complete it before I graduate this May. Email This Post!

**BREAKING**

The ASUC Judicial Council has removed their injunction against spending the frozen 54 money, presumably removing the last legal roadblock to dispersing that money. The GA had appealed to the Judicial Council after the injunction was instated, in Lafata vs. Graduate Assembly.

As there is no language within the Charter brought to us that clearly makes the contested allocation unconstitutional, the Judicial Council lifts its preliminary injunction, and as the case has been resolved, I hereby lift my previously issued gag order.

However, a section of the Graduate Assembly Charter was found to be in conflict with the ASUC Constitution, and struck down, to be replaced by new legislation.

We therefore consider the last sentence of Article V Section 4 of the Graduate Assembly to be statutorily worthless, and as such, odious to the Constitution’s requirement of the Graduate Assembly to “frame a charter that includes its…limitations for carrying out its functions…. including a section concerning funding.” That sentence in the Charter is hereby stricken, and, in accordance with the Constitution, the Graduate Assembly and ASUC Senate are ordered to frame replacement legislation consistent with this and previous Judicial Council decisions, and in a manner that clearly illustrates their meaning, by the end of the 2003-2004 academic year.

That would be this regulation:

5.4. The Graduate Assembly shall have the authority to seek non-ASUC funds as it desires, so long as such action does not conflict with the goals of the entire student body as expressed by the ASUC Constitution and does not in any way endanger the tax-exempt status of the ASUC. Any non-ASUC funds received by the Graduate Assembly must be deposited in the Assembly's ASUC account and are subject to all applicable regulations for the expenditure of ASUC funds.

(Courtesy of the GA's very snazzy new website.

I'll analyze later if I get the time.Email This Post!

Former Berkeley Professor and famed cult expert Margaret Singer died recently after a long illness. Professor Singer was most famous for testifying in the Patty Hearst trial of the 1970's. She retired in 1991 after some 30+ years at Cal.

Obits:
Guardian...
CC Times...

Thanks to Calstuff Correspondant AA for the catch.Email This Post!

Ms. Wiseman has posted a defense of her alleged Plagiarism, placing the blame squarely on her Editors. Although she doesn't deny the charge of taking all her information from the Express-- not Plagiarism strictly speaking, but lazy.

For the sake of the Patriot, and myself, it is necessary to set the record straight regarding this recent dispute about the article I wrote concerning the Berkeley Landmarks Commission.

The article submitted by me, in its original form, contained full attribution of sources. I have the documentation that clearly shows that those references were present in the article's submission. Unfortunately, for whatever reason after editing and production, those citations were omitted in the final published edition of December's Patriot. The article is currently posted on the Patriot website with all the citations that should have been included the first time.

I ask you, what motives would I have to do such a thing? To take direct quotes from another east-Bay publication to put into another publication that will largely be distributed in the east-Bay? I would never do such a thing in the first place and especially not when there is such a high probability that someone would connect the dots between the two.

I regret that the proper mentions were removed and it is unfortunate that this situation had to occur.

Email This Post!

LGBT-themed Co-op Oscar Wilde House is in the middle of a fight with Delta Upsilon over alleged anti-gay activity. Here's the petition circulated by Oscar Wilde President and BAMN Organizer Ronald Cruz

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, the Oscar Wilde House, an openly lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender (LGBT) themed co-op, was the victim of a series of homophobic acts by some residents of the Delta Upsilon (DU) fraternity.

WHEREAS, On the night of December 5, 2003, Marcio von Muhlen, DU’s new president, was left by his fraternity brothers on the Wilde House’s front porch, tied to a chair, and drenched in a nauseating combination of salad dressing, salsa, and beer. He told Wilde House members he was DU’s new president and this was the fraternity using its one opportunity to treat him badly before his term started.

WHEREAS, On June 28, 2003, four men walked into the Wilde House uninvited at 3 in the morning, were obnoxiously loud and drunk, and told a female resident of the house, “It’s okay. We love lesbians. Show us your pussy—but God hates faggots and we hate faggots.” These men had Irish accents, as did some others in other incidents listed here who identified themselves as residents of DU.

WHEREAS, On July 1, 2003, five individuals from DU carried a man who was saran-wrapped to a chair across the street to the Wilde House’s front porch and left him there. The group returned to the DU lawn, where about ten people yelled at Wilde House members to “Fuck him up the ass!” among other things, while laughing.

WHEREAS, On the street near the Wilde House at 12:30 AM on July 15, 2003, a man, accompanied by another man and a woman, hit the buttocks of a member of the Wilde House with a purse repeatedly and unprovoked as they passed by. When asked if they were from DU, they replied yes. When the Wilde House member replied he was from Wilde, this man said, “You’re gay then.” When the house member said he was not, this man said, “Well, you live there. That’s the gay house. If you live there you are gay.”

WHEREAS, After these and other incidents this summer, Wilde House communicated with von Muhlen, who was then DU’s house manager, and made clear that they felt these incidents were harassment and homophobic. However, the events of December 5 proved that DU has so far not changed its behavior.

WHEREAS, DU’s idea of humiliating their new president is to tie him up and put him on public display in front of a queer house, as if this would subject him to unwanted gay sexual advances. DU’s ritual is homophobic and based on a dehumanizing stereotype of LGBT people.

WHEREAS, These are not the only incidents of harassment Wilde House has received from DU. In October or November of 1999, a friend of a current member of the Wilde House was dropped off in front of the house, when approximately ten men rushed out of DU and ran after him. Two women of our house stepped outside to confront the men. The men left after yelling "dyke" at the two women.

THEREFORE, We, ____________, condemn the homophobic actions of residents of Delta Upsilon against the Oscar Wilde House. Such anti-LGBT actions will not be tolerated in Berkeley.

THEREFORE, We, ____________, call on Delta Upsilon to make a written apology to the Oscar Wilde House and to the public for its homophobic actions, and to make a formal commitment to stop harassing LGBT people in the future.

Oscar Wilde House contact person and president-elect:
Ronald Cruz, LangeHaare@aol.com

Email This Post!

The Play Lives On



ESPN has named the last play of the Cal vs. Stanford 1982 Big Game (a.k.a. "The Play") as the "Pontiac Ultimate High-Performance Play of the NCAA."

You can watch the video clip on the same site, www.espn.com/pontiac (as if you haven't already seen it).

The quality of the clip is decent, but if you want a better version, check out this archived clip from ESPN Motion.Email This Post!

Boalt has a new Dean, replacing the disgraced John Dwyer. The new guy is a Harvard Professor famous for his work on Social Justice theory. For Boalt this is probably the best of both worlds. He's Progressive, but also highly respected by mainstream opinion.

Ignacio Chapela was denied tenure. Email This Post!

Comments are working, but the comments number counter isn't. I'll look into it tomorrow.Email This Post!

The Patriot has been caught blatantly plagiarizing from the East Bay Express, lifting quotes and even using their letters page for 'original reporting.' The Reporter, Vanessa Wiseman, apparently rewrote an earlier article from the Express about the Berkeley Landmarks Commission.

some passages and quotes from the Patriot article are identical to those that appeared in the original. Hell, the writer even lifted inaccuracies the Express later corrected in print. Two people quoted in the Patriot version -- who seemed, oddly enough, to have used precisely the same words as when they spoke with the Express months earlier -- told Bottom Feeder they have never talked to the Patriot writer, Vanessa Wiseman, or anyone from the student magazine. For just a minute there, Feeder thought Wiseman had at least managed to do one original interview -- with Berkeley Planning Commissioner John Curl -- until another Expresso recognized his quotes as coming from a letter we ran complaining about the original story.

The Patriot has given a half-assed explanation, calling the lack of attributions an editing error.

CORRECTION: Because of an editing error, the article "Landmark Decisions that Shape Berkeley's Future" failed to attribute several quotations to the Eastbay Express, from which they were taken. The quotations of Mary Hanna,Mary Ann Beach Harrell, John Curl, and Leslie Emington were published by the Eastbay Express. The California Patriot regrets the error. A corrected version of the story appears below.

Come on. They stole the entire idea. They stole the quotes. They stole every bit of original reporting. And it went into the magazine without a credit for the reporter, Will Harper, that worked on the article. This isn't an 'editing error.' Even attributing the quotes doesn't change that this is theft of somebody else's work, taking their research and doing a hack rewrite. Shoddy.Email This Post!

Public Affairs has an interesting article detailing the search for the new Chancellor. It's been noted before that the Daily Cal hasn't been covering this story at all.Email This Post!

Here's the Daily Cal's account of the upcoming 54 lawsuits.

Lets look at this strategically and legally, to the best of my understanding. Unfortunately, I'm no lawyer.

The Graduate Assembly is looking to achieve two goals. The first is to institute the legality of its political spending. The second is to prevent the Chancellor from instituting oversights and such over GA/ASUC spending.

As I've already gone over, I believe that the GA actually has a strong case to have their spending approved. This stands on a couple of reasons. The first is that organizations have basically free rein to spend however they want, so long as there is a refund mechanism and equal funds available to opposing groups. The second is that Governments do have the right to engage in lobbying on student matters. 54 did have a lot of application to student matters. So the University would have to prove that the GA is, first, an official student government, and two, that the spending is illegal. Mr. Kashmiri's enthusiasm aside, this is not a sure win for the GA, but it's pretty strong.

There are caveats. The same guidelines specifically order Governments to

However, an allocation to the same organization for purposes unrelated to the University's legitimate purposes (for example, an allocation specifically earmarked for direct financial support of a particular political party, candidate or election campaign) would be impermissible.

You can tell how strong it is by how the University refused to block it. If it's illegal, they have to block it. Why would the University give a 'do-over' for $35,000 in illegal funding? Unlikely

But here's where the second goal is, and where the strategic element comes into play. What the Graduate Assembly has consistently refused to consider is the Chancellor's ability to go Nuclear. Here's the relevant passages:

Chancellors are responsible for the fiscal soundness of student governments. In the discharge of this responsibility, Chancellors may make audits of the finances of student governments, exercise control over expenditures of their funds when and to the extent necessary to maintain financial solvency of student governments, and where necessary may take action to ensure that any activity under control of student governments is operated in accordance with sound business practices consonant with University policies and procedures applicable to such practices.

There's also

Chancellors have authority to authorize or discontinue student governments as official units of the University of California, responsible for representing student constituencies comprising either the student body as a whole or particular segments of it. Chancellors may also assign to such student governments specified powers and other responsibilities concerning student affairs.

This gives wide-ranging powers to the Chancellor, rights that do not appear to be constrained by anything else in University policy. Even should the GA win this case to allow their spending, there appears to be little constraining the Chancellor from taking punitive actions: removing powers, cutting funding, and anything else that he might desire. Or to take the ultimate step: making student group fund assignation belong to some University-controlled Committee. How could anyone stop him? A lawsuit on free speech grounds? Possible, but the Chancellor could also argue that the recent state of the ASUC's finances are awful enough to merit a University takeover. The GA is already unclear on how they seek to overturn the University's move to tighten controls on funding. On what grounds? As the GA's press release notes, the ASUC Auxiliary already exists, establishing that the University is entitled to funding oversight. I dunno.

So the GA appears to be making a bet that the Chancellor doesn't have the balls to go nuclear-- or that if he does, they'll be able to block this on Free Speech grounds, or on the Memoranda of Understanding. And they're also betting that negotiations will bear fruit if enough pressure is behind the University accepting the GA's demands. It's a workable strategy, but a dangerous game, with very high stakes should the GA lose.

It makes me the most uncomfortable that the GA is effectively using the ASUC's funding as a pawn in this game. Should the GA lose, it's the ASUC that will feel the brunt of it, with loss of fee access or funding oversights. It's the ASUC that's already feeling the brunt of it. That the ASUC and GA leadership are virtually indistinguishable doesn't mean that the ASUC shouldn't disassociate itself from this. CalSERVE should hedge their bets. Make it clear that the ASUC is entirely separate from this in order to ensure that the ASUC will not bear the brunt of University wrath should the worst-case scenario occur. It won't hurt the GA's legal case or negotiations, and will provide a fallback should the GA lose. No loss and considerable gain.

It also makes me worry that the Graduate Assembly is so confident of victory. Perhaps it's just a show of confidence for the press, but Mr. Kashmiri has never admitted the possibility of defeat. This is not sound strategy. With stakes like these, it's vital to have backup plans for worst case scenarios and to adequately assess the stakes, EG, protecting the ASUC's independence outside of the GA's plans. Presumably the GA's legal team has done this, and I'm not privy to it. Email This Post!

The new Columnist decisions are out. I had heard good things, so the actual decisions are pretty disappointing. No News Columnists. No Squelch Columnists. A Sports Columnist, despite having an entire sports section already. The new SOT girl is apparently an internal Daily Cal Review writer. I didn't read Ms. Stein this semester. Here's the list:

M: Gina Merlone
T: Jia Jung
W: Faith Stein
Th: Amina Sutherland-Stolting
F: Guest Columnists

The Guest Columnists were fun back when they did them a few years ago, so that's a bright spot.Email This Post!

Breaking...
Graduate Assembly approves possible lawsuit against University
Vows to fight new University oversight mechanisms
Will pursue lawsuit if negotiations break down.

Graduate Assembly Press release:

Berkeley, CA - The Graduate Assembly (GA) of the University of California, Berkeley has made a historic decision to go as far as necessary to protect the free speech rights of all students on this campus. "We simply felt that the time had come to take a step forward against the attempts of the University to curb our ability to participate in the political process," comments Graduate Assembly President Jessica Quindel. Citing two court cases (ASUCR v. Regents and Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Wisconsin Sys. v. Southworth) the Assembly approved a motion to enter into negotiations with the University over their most current reading of University policy, and, if necessary, to institute litigation over the interpretation.

Takeshi Akiba, the Chair of the GA Organization and Rules Committee and a doctoral student in the Jurisprudence and Social Policy program, argued, "Forty years ago, the Free Speech Movement on this campus demanded the right of students and student groups to support political campaigns. Since then, UC Berkeley has established its identity as a place where civic participation is valued both as students' right and as part of university's mission. We as a community must protect our First Amendment Rights and our legacy."

Although the Chancellor agreed to allow the Graduate Assembly to pay off the debts incurred during the No on 54 campaign with student commercial revenues, he further restricted spending of student fee and commercial revenue money by both the Associated Students of the University of California (ASUC) and the GA. Upon hearing of the decision, ASUC External Affairs Vice President Anu Joshi stated, "We stand firm with graduate students in our belief that they acted within the University, system-wide, and court-ordered policies currently in place, and are disappointed in the Chancellor's attempt to curtail our ability to participate in the political process".

The decision by the Assembly was made based on three key pieces of evidence:

1. The 1994 Memoranda of Understanding between the Chancellor and the ASUC clearly defined the separation between student government and the University; hence the GA should not be considered an official unit of the University.
2. Elected officials in student governments are in place to represent students both on and off campus, and the UC Office of the President 1999 Guidelines clearly state that student government may participate in political activities.
3. Financial affairs are already mediated by a University entity, the ASUC Auxiliary. It is charged with maintaining the fiscal soundness of the Graduate Assembly and the ASUC; therefore, there is no need for further scrutiny by any other University body.

"The University is trying to have it both ways. It trots out its "student government is a 'official unit' of the University" argument when it wants to control student speech, then affirms student government independence when that's what serves its interests. The GA is here to say, 'No - student government can and will represent student views on issues that students want to lobby for, and the University may not stand in their way'," said one of the GA's attorneys, Michael Sorgen.

"No doubt exists in my mind that our position is solid and affirms the rights of all students. Our lawyers will attempt to negotiate with the University, but if they refuse to negotiate, we will be forced to pursue litigation," stated Ms. Quindel.

More as it develops...
This is the Daily Cal's last day of publication, so dunno how closely they'll be covering this.

Email This Post!

Here's a better account of the strike call-off from AP.Email This Post!

**BREAKING BREAKING***

STRIKE AVERTED

The GSI Strike planned for this week has been called off...

More as it develops...

The Chron sez...

United Auto Workers Local 2865 (UAW) shortly after 11:30 p.m. announced that a tentative agreement has been reached between the UC and the union, which represents 11,000 teaching assistants, readers and tutors at eight UC campuses....

UAW spokesman Rajan Mehta on Tuesday morning said productive talks could abort plans for a strike, which if begun could continue through the semester's Dec. 18 end....

If the strike does go on, it would affect UC's undergraduate campuses in Berkeley, Davis, Santa Cruz, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Riverside, Irvine and San Diego.

"All campuses have contingency plans in place to make sure students get the teaching they deserve'' and that classes will continue as scheduled, Schwartz said Tuesday.

Email This Post!

Berkeley is finally getting rid of the ancient UClink e-mail system in January-- and replacing it with a far superior one. The biggest change will be the long-awaited switchover to simple ked@berkeley.edu addresses, as opposed to ked@uclink.berkeley.edu. Other big changes include reliability, an improved webmail interface, and getting rid of Berkeley's amazingly complicated system of separate networks. Plus a larger mailbox quota and better mailing list management.

Goodbye to Uclink.

UCLink's demise has been in the cards for years. The venerable system debuted more than a decade ago – an eternity in the fast-moving world of digital communications. Its 45,000 current accounts send more than 400,000 e-mail messages on a typical day, severely testing UCLink's aging infrastructure. The program's software is no longer supported by its vendor, and "the current hardware is already past the end of its usable life," said Brion Moss, technical lead for BERT and an analyst with Central Computing Services. "We're nursing it and babying it and burping it to try to keep it going."

Email This Post!

The Hair Professor barber shop on Bancroft, near Eshleman, has been renamed 'Kute Kutz.'

This Squelch newsflash is now forever irrelevant.Email This Post!

Clark Kerr dies
First Chancellor at Berkeley and UC President.

Daily Cal
New York Times...
LA Times...Email This Post!

Cal Football Update



Cal has accepted a bowl bid and is going to the 15th Annual Insight Bowl in Phoenix, AZ, on December 26th! The Golden Bears (7-6) will be up against Virginia Tech (8-4) live on ESPN at the Bank One Ballpark. Kickoff is at 5:00pm PST.

Ticket orders are being accepted until December 12th.

More information.

GO BEARS!Email This Post!

It's certainly been a week of everything going to shit for Cal. Outside of the Big Game.

Ms. Stein is probably correct-- the spending by the GA is probably legal according to UCOP regulations. Hence the University allowing it, which I'm arguing isn't so much 'we're letting them spend this one,' as a beautiful piece of press management coupled with power politics. Allowing the spending with a stern reprimand and additional regulations is a superb way to disguise their really weak legal case to stop the spending.

But what isn't mentioned, and should be the next pressing concern, is the credit rating of the ASUC. There hasn't been enough mention of how, for all the torturous University struggles to avoid lawsuits, we are on the hook for some $28,000 of vendor spending. I'm not sure if they sue the ASUC or the individuals that promised them the money, but they have both the right and the means to sue. I'm surprised they haven't already. I wish I could share Mr. Kashmiri's confidence that all this will end in a complete victory for the students and ASUC.

GSIs are intending to strike. The University is promising that everything will be fine for students if they take off.

All final exams and class meetings will go forward as scheduled, but under extraordinary circumstances, regulations on “Pass/Not Pass” grades, alternative final exams and grading deadlines will be relaxed, campus officials said.

Be concerned! This could well lead to a massive bureaucratic morass and mixed up final grades. Should the strike continue past Finals, what is making the GSIs grade papers from last semester? I doubt they'll be under any legal or moral constraint to do so. And then who'll take care of them? Lecturers?

And we're getting boned by the State again, solidifying UC's role as whipping boy in the budget crisis. Email This Post!

Stanfurd is claiming that the Pier Thieves wanted a ransom of $300 for the return of the Tree.

After learning of the Tree costume theft, the Cal Band manager sent out an e-mail telling students to return the Tree before Big Game or face possible legal action from the Stanford Band. At around midnight on Friday, the Cal students sent an anonymous ransom note to the Cal Band manager, who forwarded it to the Stanford Band manager.

The note specified a return of the costume for a payment of $300 to be delivered to the students at the sports store between 4 a.m. and 4:30 a.m. on Friday morning. Rothacker was with three past Trees, junior Andrew Parker, senior Chuck Armstrong and Evan Meagher, Class of 2001, when he learned of the ransom note from the Band manager.

A ransom, especially a monetary ransom, is disgraceful to Cal Spirit and dishonorable to the team. Thankfully whoever came up with that idea apparently changed their mind and just left the Tree in pieces at Stanfurd.Email This Post!

Here's the Stanfurd Daily's account of the Theft of the Tree, the first theft since 1998. During the game one of the Rally Commers displayed a bit of tree costume and wondered where this 'new tree' came from.

The Stanford Band’s Tree costume was stolen yesterday at around 3:30 p.m. while the Band was performing in a rally with the UC-Berkeley band at Pier 39 in San Francisco, according to members of the Stanford Band.

Lets call this one the Pier Theft, until we hear any of any better term for it.

Rothacker made the following statement: “To whomever stole the costume, you are mistaken to think that this act of stupidity would do anything but incite more Stanford spirit.”

He added, “Right now, I just feel sorry for you guys . . . more than ever before.”

Ohhhh noooooo

Email This Post!

CAL WINS THE 106TH BIG GAME!



Final score: 28-16 over Stanfurd. We kept the axe.

539 yards of offense, 359 passing (Rodgers' career best).

Geoff McArthur had 16 catches (new Cal record) for 245 yards.

Cal scored 21 of its 28 points in the 4th quarter, which was most definitely ours.

The Golden Bears (7-6, 5-3 Pac-10) are now eligible to play in a bowl game. Which bowl hasn't been determined yet, but likely locations are Las Vegas (Las Vegas Bowl - Dec 24), Phoenix, Arizona (Insight Bowl - Dec 26), or El Paso, Texas (Sun Bowl - Dec 31).

GO BEARS!Email This Post!

That the University is going to pay for the no-on-54 spending is actually the least surprising or troubling of the University's proposed resolution for the situation.

After talking it over, I was convinced that the University had a reasonably weak legal case to deny the Prop 54 spending. Here's the relevant guidelines. There's different available readings, but the gist is that A) Organizations can spend however they want, so long as there's a refund mechanism, and B) Student Governments can spend money on lobbying so long as its student related. 54 was pretty student related-- there's a lot of research out there that would be cancelled should it have passed.

So the University would've been forced to prove that the Graduate Assembly is both a Government, which it barely is, and that 54 wasn't very student related. Of course, they might've won, but it was hardly a sure thing, and the University is not interested in risky bets.

The Graduate Assembly was expecting the University to come out with a compromise. That is, to allow the spending in some sort of fudge. This is exactly what they ended up doing.

They said the reimbursement will come from ASUC commercial activities instead of mandatory student fees, the other source of ASUC revenue.

The University's carefully planned 'Well, we'll let this one slide,' message is pathetic, incidentally. This is a matter of law. There's no 'letting things slide,' in the law. Either it's legal and you have to let it happen, or it's illegal and you don't. Redirecting the spending is a tacit admission that the spending is legal. They could've used Auxiliary money from the first day and been apparently free of legal problems.

But anyway, the GA was expecting a compromise, where the money issue was a fudge in exchange for the GA not setting a precedent of allowing this kind of spending. BUT this, in retrospect, seems naive. The University knows how the GA works, by now. They know that compromise was unlikely, and would probably just end in a GA lawsuit anyway. Hell, they probably knew that the GA had already retained lawyers. So they've gone on the offensive.

Despite relieving ASUC officials of thousands of dollars of debt to vendors, the university’s carefully worded explanation reaffirmed its authority over student government spending.

Indeed, university officials said they will increase oversight of ASUC spending, putting authorization in the hands of Horace Mitchell, vice chancellor of business and administrative services.

And university officials are asking the ASUC and the assembly to bring their rules in line with current university policy.

That oversight part should send alarm bells ringing. At the moment it doesn't appear like it could legally have much effect. The UCOP guidelines haven't changed, so any new 'authorizers' will still have to use the lenient UCOP rules. Although this certainly means that the VC could tie up spending with ease, preventing precedents from being set and ensuring that the University will have the first say in the ASUC/GA's forays into national politics.

But the Chancellor has considerable powers in assigning or taking away abilities from the ASUC. There's several passages assigning that right, with a lot of vagueness. Here's just one:

Chancellors are responsible for the fiscal soundness of student governments. In the discharge of this responsibility, Chancellors may make audits of the finances of student governments, exercise control over expenditures of their funds when and to the extent necessary to maintain financial solvency of student governments, and where necessary may take action to ensure that any activity under control of student governments is operated in accordance with sound business practices consonant with University policies and procedures applicable to such practices.

So for all the GA's bravado, they're playing with a bad hand. If they get the money, they have a reasonably strong case to spend it broadly. But the Chancellor can move to keep them from getting the money. They should keep that firmly in mind.



Email This Post!

Don't forget to go to Laugh your Axe Off tonight at 8 in the Bear's Lair. The Heuristic Squelch staff will be doing skits and standup for the amusement of whatever Rally Comm people show up. Email This Post!

The new Squelch is out. This one marks a historic high point in the use of Short Dialog Pieces. First really seen in the Holohan/Keane period, the beginning of the modern era, the short dialogue piece offers economy in words and easy editing. I've been a sort of Johnny Shortdialogpieceseed lately, spreading them throughout the ideas of the new kids and fighting for them against better pieces.Email This Post!

Dean Kenney handed down the charges to the Berkeley 3. Mr. Shingavi and Ms. Odes both face 20 hours of community service and a letter of reprimand. It's Mr. Smith's sentence that's raising eyebrows-- he gets 30 hours of community service and a suspension.. UNLESS he completes an 'anger management class' at the Tang Center. Then he gets a letter of reprimand.. PROBABLY.

I'm surprised that the University went after these three. They didn't occupy Wheeler, disrupting classes and bothering students, they occupied Sproul, both a traditional target and an Administrative building. They announced in advance their intention to do so; they even met with Administration people in advance. Prosecuting the ringleaders make it pretty obvious this is a political prosecution, additionally. Even given the silliness of the protest-- declare Iraq U a sister school? -- and the eye-rolling 'spontaneous' walkout from their trial... I don't see how this really violates any educational mission. So what's the point?Email This Post!

The 106th BIG GAME will also be broadcast live on ABC 7 and KGO 810 AM.

Notable Big Game Week Events:

Friday 7:00pm - Bonfire Rally @ Greek Theater

Sat 10:00am - The Big Game Tailgate Party @ Frost Amphitheatre, Stanfurd

Let's keep the AXE home in Berkeley... where it belongs!

Email This Post!

Lets talk about Administration communication with students and the press, since I just got involved with it recently.

I'm often surprised by how poor this communication is, for the most part. It was only last year that the Chancellor started using mass e-mails to communicate things-- something that has been effective and should've been implemented many, many years before.

When I worked on that Code of Conduct story, getting ahold of Administration people was an entire pain in the ass. They wouldn't meet with me. They made me interview via e-mail. They evaded questions. And they lost control of a crucial opportunity to present the new draft to students. For no reason that I can comprehend, they were willing to jeopardize something that had been worked on for months rather then spend thirty minutes talking to the press. If they had bothered to talk to me, even assuming I was going to be hostile, they would've basically known what I was going to write about, put the best possible spin on the matter, and clarify what looked shady from the opposing side's point of view.

Heck, they knew a story about it was coming. Send out a press release announcing the new code revisions, outlining why they made the changes, and announcing the timeline for revisions. It's coming out anyway, and this way you look up front about it. Very basic press management. Then the story becomes 'University announces press release,' instead of 'University secretly unveils code changes.'

In general their publicizing of this code change has been pathetic. They failed to present it to faculty first, giving opponents the first opportunity to attack it as killing due process. Now there's a significant block of faculty that are motivated to oppose it. There was no Administration response in the Editorial pages on Friday, as opposed to two powerful op-eds against them. Chances are we'll see some quiet announcement during Thanksgiving when all students are gone, something that'll just make them look shady again...

I've been wondering why they're so bad at this. My best theory is that the internal University culture strongly discourages talking to the press. Certainly Chancellor Berdahl hasn't been the best example to follow on that. An Administration member happy to chat with the press and considered a 'leaker' by superiors can see career advancement stop, so they'll keep quiet even to the detriment of their projects.

Another possible reason is that University officials are afraid to step on the toes of colleagues and superiors in how they characterize matters. Talking without the input of everyone else would make them look like prima donnas, mischaracterizing their colleagues, and ignoring their contributions.

The third reason is the Conspiracy version. Perhaps the University has so many things to hide that talking unrestricted to the press will lead to many other unpleasant things getting out. Email This Post!

BEARS DOMINATE 54-7



Cal sets a school record with 729 total yards against Washington.
348 passing, 381 rushing.
McArthur - 6 catches, 180 yards.
Rodgers - 20 for 33, 348 yards.
J.J. Arrington - 14 carries, 185 yards.

Cal is now 6-6, 4-3 in the Pac-10, and is looking to beat Stanfurd in the Big Game next week to have a shot at a bowl game.

[recap]Email This Post!

Email This Post!

Cal will be doing extra reviews of students admitted with low SATS for this fall.

Responding to recent controversy about UC Berkeley's admissions practices, members of a faculty oversight group next spring will review the cases in which admissions officials recommend accepting high school seniors with very low SAT scores.

As usual, Berkeley's attempt to quell controversy is destined to be more controversial and idiotic then simply sticking by their guns. For example, why is it only the people with low SATs that are getting double-checks? Why not the people admitted with low grades and high SATs? Or the people admitted with high SATs and grades, but absolutely no extracurricular work? All of these things have different weights in the application process, and it's a given that some will be admitted despite abysmal results in one. There's no good reason to just examine the marginal low SAT people other then it's been getting media controversy.

Professor Stern appears to recognize this, coming up with a lame 'oh, this is nothing,' excuse that will convince no one.

Stern downplayed the significance of the faculty review, comparing it to other customary spot checks that occur at the end of every admissions cycle. "I suspect it won't make much difference at all in actual [admissions] decisions," he said.

"We'll read them individually, and we'll talk about them if it's necessary," he said of the review of admissions decisions.

No way. This is a very specific spot check due to controversy, and one that may affect which students pass the first round of the admissions process. Email This Post!

**BREAKING**

The DA decided to drop all charges against ASUC President Primm.

**MORE AS IT DEVELOPS**Email This Post!

The Big Game fast approaches. The Berkeleyan has an interesting piece on similar rivalries, including one Economics one I had no idea about.

There's others that aren't mentioned. Certainly the Ink Bowl, the Daily Cal vs. the Stanfurd Daily. The Squelch wanted to put together a 'Big Bee' vs the Stanfurd Chapparal. It fell through.Email This Post!

Old Daily Cal hidden site.Email This Post!

Make sure to sign up for Senior Portraits this week, should you be a Senior.Email This Post!

Journalizin

I resigned my position as a Daily Cal staff writer today. It was an interesting four days on staff. I considered leading the News Staff in an ineffectual rebellion, but, you know, so little time.

I think I can give my opinion on the Code of Conduct changes, as well as the Administration's awful news management policies, without violating any code of ethics. But I'm going to ask first.

Email This Post!

Regent Chair Moore, still scrabbling for evidence that his less-then-shocking Admissions report is actually a surprise, has released several new charges.

It's possible that the lower-then-average GPA is a concern. But then, it's extremely possible that it isn't. GPAs vary incredibly widely based on majors. That's one big reason why the average GPA of the Greek System is higher then the GPA on average. Greeks probably don't tend towards the Engineering and Science majors that have lower GPAs on average. I wouldn't say that's anything to be especially proud of.

Even if GPAs are lower, it's likely that's an artifact of ESL or financial circumstances. For example, we already know that lower SATs are correlated with lower household income. We also know that lower household income is probably correlated with working second jobs to pay for college. And it's also probable that working second jobs is correlated with lower grades. Removing these causalities and controlling just for Low SAT --> Low GPA is going to be difficult.

I can say with confidence that Regent Moore is uninterested in examining these causalities, since he also makes the claim that low SATs lead to high dropout rates. How can you separate this from low SAT correlating with low household income and big family problems leading to higher dropout rates?

So in any case, before we establish that low SATs means low academic attainment and such, we're going to have to filter out a wealth of other explanatory variables. It's very basic statistics, and very bad scholarship to posit causalties before running the numbers. Do the math! It's fun!Email This Post!

Don't miss the A-Capella Showcase, if you're an A-Capella groupie.

It's the third West Coast A Cappella Showcase, featuring UC MEN'S OCTET and California Golden Overtones. Featured guests tonight include Artists in Resonance, the CAL JAZZ CHOIR, Vocal Point from Brigham Young University and Stanford University's Mendicants and Harmonics. On Saturday, the guest groups are the SoCal VoCals, UCLA's Awaken A Capella and Random Voices, University of Santa Barbara's Naked Voices, and the University of Oregon's On the Rocks and Divisi.

Berkeley 8 p.m. today-Saturday. WHEELER AUDITORIUM, UC BERKELEY. $10, $8 students, $6 UC Berkeley students. (510) 642-3880.

Email This Post!

Nothing quite like a dumbass New York Times travel writer writing a stereotype-ladden account of Berkeley. Students don't appear once in this whirlwind around the area.

there's the real possibility of a psychedelic sunset or a Maxfield Parrish moonscape. Sensible shoes are de rigeur, not a Manolo in sight. But true to the hippie stereotype, you'll see scads of Birkenstocks. People here take liberation seriously. Fashion tip: Don't wear fur.

I never see people in Birkenstocks. And why, even with the liberation silliness aside, would anyone wear fur around the usually-grimy streets of Berkeley? It's a bad fashion choice in any case. Email This Post!

This bit on legal Napster downloading raises the possibility of such a program being at Berkeley some day.

Officials at San Jose State University and University of California-Berkeley applauded the Napster-Penn State program as a sign of progress in once-contentious relationships between educators and the recording industry. But they aren't planning on rolling out similar services soon.

``UC-Berkeley does not have a student technology fee to use as part of the full site license the way Penn State does. We are not looking at any additional student fees due to the large increase in tuition costs in California this year,'' wrote chief information officer Jack McCredie in an e-mail. ``However, we will certainly follow the Penn State pilot very closely. If our students would like such a site license and be willing to fund it in some way, I'm sure we could implement it quickly.''

Good answer. But someday perhaps this will work out. Certainly Berkeley, massive University that it is, would be a big win in the anti-downloading wars.Email This Post!

Though I've never given much thought to the US News public university rankings, apparently the folks out at the University of Virginia do. More precisely, their student paper, the Cavalier Daily, has seen it necessary to publish a few articles commenting on Berkeley's recent supremecy.

An op-ed from Wednesday...

and an article from 2001...

and one from 2000.Email This Post!

Word is that BCR is starting a drive to have a mass refund of their money from the ASUC, over the no-on-54 efforts.

Speaking of which, where's that report that OSL was supposed to publish last week? They had promised a legal recommendation on the spending, but it doesn't appear to have made it out of the office.

I've been busy doing some journalisting. Back soon!Email This Post!

As my Blogging career winds down I've been thinking about what it means in a larger context, and what I've gotten out of it. So I wrote an essay on the possibilities.

The Blogger as Journalist

The Blog Community grew quickly into prominence immediately after September 11th, and soon became a free-wheeling world of commentary and opinion. Its respectable enough that opinion-leaders and columnists have both started blogs and found them to be useful, and its intelligent enough that bloggers have been quoted in major newspapers. I was recently quoted in the LA Times for opinion on the recent Berkeley Admissions story. Unfortunately, opinion is where it the Blogosphere has stayed, in a symbiotic but ultimately dependent relationship with professional journalists. And this has been, I think, a hindrance to blogging. Blogging acts as a supplement at best-- pointing out errors, adding context, but always secondary to the CNN story being linked to.

Very few bloggers have made the crucial leap into being journalists in their own right. And yet whenever this approach has been tried, it has been enormously successful. The most obvious model is when journalists start a blog of their own. The Sacramento Bee's Daniel Weintraub was a force in the Recall campaign. Daniel Marshall is traveling to New Hampshire on reader donations. Another model has been first-hand accounts-- Where's Raed, or one of many technology-oriented blogs that post personal experiences. More ordinary political blogs dip into first-hand accounts as well, and these usually end up being more interesting then another dose of somewhat predictable commentary. Another close and important example are the guerilla journalists of the Indymedias.

But I can think of very few examples of bloggers-- ordinary, non-journalist bloggers-- breaking stories and posting original material. So I have been trying this on my own Blog, Calstuff. (calstuff.blogspot.com). Originally nothing more then a running commentary on the local newspaper, the Daily Cal, I've gotten the most satisfaction and hits from coming up with original stories. In a two year stint as a Blogger, I've counted 33 original stories, most small but a surprising number fairly large. And it's also possible that if what I've been trying is evaluated and improved upon, the next stage of Blogging as a step beyond traditional journalism is both practical and desirable.

Context:

I'm a Senior at the University of California, Berkeley, majoring in Economics and intended Law Student. In my career here I spent two years working in the local student government, the ASUC. I also spent two years writing for the Berkeley Political Review, am the Creative Editor for the Heuristic Squelch, the humor magazine, and two semesters as a Columnist for the Daily Californian. I won four or five awards for that last one. I started blogging at Calstuff in January of 2002.

Stories:

The most important story ever broken here was actually broken by an associate, Mike Mcfarlane. He was the first to post that Mayoral Candidate Tom Bates was caught trashing Daily Californians after they endorsed his opponent. The story later made the SF Chronicle and Oakland Tribune. The second most important story was the theft of an entire print run of the California Patriot, the Conservative paper, after they wrote a cover story critical of a local Latino group. This later made Conservative publications around the Country.

Yet while these were fun, the essence of successful news blogging has been local stories. Bluntly, it is not possible for a blogger to cover regional or national stories on a regular basis. Bloggers who try to cover these areas will always have ties to a powerful journalism organization or have important contacts in these areas. But on a local basis a blogger can have an impact. With some friends in high places and a camera, I can cover an internal rebellion at the Daily Cal. I can find out about swastikas scrawled in a campus building, or that the ASUC President was arrested for brawling with police.

Here's a complete list of stories Calstuff has broken:

Theft of California Patriots (2.26.02)
University Frat Party Suspension (4.22.02)
Further delayal of Elections results (4.29.02)
Firing of 3 Resident Assistants for party in dorms. (9.19.02)
Makeup of Student Conduct Committee on Hernandez hearings (9.29.02)
Internal Daily Cal Rebellion (10.30.02)
BCR President forced to resign (11.02.02)
Berkeley Mayoral Candidate caught trashing papers (11.04.02)
Office of Student Life investigates Rally Committee Axe Parade (12.05.02)
Stabbing at Top Dog (2.19.03)
Internal struggle in the Student Advocate Office (2.20.03)
Wheeler occupied by Protestors (3.5.03)
Eric Schewe elected new Daily Cal EIC (4.12.03)
ASUC Elections thrown into turmoil by incorrect voting (4.14.03)
Code violations by the Berkeley Jewish Journal (4.17.03)
Student Advocate Candidate disqualified from running (5.4.03)
Daily Cal suffers thefts after story on football player's arrest. (5.7.03)
Regents vote to increase student fees (7.17.03)
Lawsuit filed against Regents over fee increases (7.24.03)
Injunction against student fee increases fails in court (8.13.03)
Cal student fails to get enough signatures for Gubernatorial run (8.14.03)
Student sent to hospital by gang violence on Frat Row (8.21.03)
Student Advocate Office collaborating in absence of actual Student Advocate (8.21.03)
Had the only existing copy of the ASUC Budget for 4 months (8.28.03)
OSL Greek Advisor to resign (9.5.03)
BCR / OSL arguments over reserving Sproul steps for 9.11 memorial (9.9.03)
Swastikas scrawled in Leconte Hall (9.9.03)
GSIs to strike (10.01.03)
ACLU filing lawsuit against BCR for propaganda restrictions (10.10.03)
ASUC President arrested for fighting with police (10.19.03)
Administration interviewing students with low SATs (10.20.03)
Daily Cal to stay in Eshleman Hall (10.27.03)
DAFKA being kicked out of Hillel (10.29.03)

Many of these are small, or being concurrently covered by the Daily Californian; it's no remarkable thing to show up at a protest with a camera and have it online thirty minutes later. Nor does this lead to a large readership: I have approximately 300 readers, although that number includes the Daily Cal's Editors and the Dean of Students. But there's the thrill from being the first with the news, and from not so rarely influencing what larger papers cover. There's also the thrill that comes from being close to the ground, from watching a large University grow and change, and having a basic understanding how everything works.

News Blogging pays off career-wise, too. I got a job as a Columnist largely because the Daily Cal knew about my blogging work. I went on to spend a year as a Columnist, while never giving up Calstuff. And when a student wanted someone to break a story recently, they came to me.

There's even the small possibility of shaping the media's perception of Berkeley nationwide. When the LA Times came to Berkeley they interviewed me for the 'student reaction' to their story about the admission of applicants with low SAT scores. Any student could tell them that no one here really cared-- and that their image of Berkeley as a hotbed of Admissions activism is six years out of date. And I could tell them that.

More effectively, and the Cal Patriot does this frequently, any student with a website can gain instant access to the nationwide media with the right story. The Cal Patriot, a Conservative magazine, got their start by leveraging the nationwide Conservative media's interest in portraying Berkeley as a hotbed of intolerance. A perfect example came when the local Student Senate fought against having red, white and blue ribbons at a memorial for September 11th. The Patriot ran the story on their website, where it was picked up by Fox News and the Drudge Report. An embarrassed Administration stepped in, and patriotic ribbons were everywhere.

The tools for this are mostly psychological. Most importantly, they require at least a measure of neutrality -- or barring that, a dedication to certain neutral ideals. No one will give me hints if they think I'll twist them for my own gain-- or leak their name out of spite. Not to imply that I'm very good at neutrality, as I'm not, but it's something that is required to be more then a mouthpiece for one ideology. Also helpful are a good digital camera and an absolute willingness to make corrections if warranted. If you post rumor on occasion, it's good to indicate it as such and work to confirm it.

Future

In any case, the idea here is that Calstuff is a rough prototype for a more polished and effective form of local news blogging. The goal would be a step forward into a rough network of local bloggers, adding news coverage to more traditional blogging activities. Perhaps forging relationships with the local news as a source near to the ground, with an excellent sense of what's going on. Putting up more first-hand accounts of events. If blogging is to move beyond its subsidiary relationship with journalism, this is the logical next step.

Email This Post!

Cal puts up big numbers
Beats Arizona State, 51-23...
AP...

Email This Post!

The Bowles Halloween Party-- barely allowed as is-- has been raided by police. So far five attendees have been arrested for being a minor and drunk.

More as it comes in...Email This Post!

After voting to sue the BCR at J-Council, the Berkeley ACLU has opted instead to focus on the trend of campus political groups searching patrons at their events to confiscate opposing literature. These challenges will take place at the level of student group code of conduct either in changes or enforcement, rather than by way of lawsuit.

The reason for dropping the lawsuit approach seems to be a matter of efficiency in promoting free speech. It seems nothing at the campus level prohibits view-point-dependent confiscation at public events, and the action is certainly not limited to BCR. Even worse, the confiscations are not confined to protestors carrying stacks of fliers, but anyone possessing them in the solitary, which is entirely unreasonable.

Most BACLU members still stand against the prohibition of 11”×17” placards (i.e. large paper in size) at public events and in favor of allowing groups to prohibit posters (anything larger than that). This highlights what an ambiguous issue the freedom of speech truly is; people will always disagree on what constitutes a public versus private forum, what actions squelch dissent, and so on.
Email This Post!

I put together a list of stories that I can reasonably claim were on Calstuff first. I'm using it more as an example of the ability of Blogs to do original stories then as any claim to being a journalist. It also includes some iffy examples: stuff that may have been on the Indybay newswire or perhaps another website beforehand. There's also more then a few that are 'first' by virtue only of instanteous posting, rather then any skill in gathering information. Quite a few aren't mine, in addition. The arguably top story ever first seen on here-- the Mayor Bates thefts-- was posted by Mike Mcfarlane.

Those caveats aside, I still think it's a pretty good record for nearly two years of Blogging.

Theft of California Patriots (2.26.02)
University Frat Party Suspension (4.22.02)
Further delayal of Elections results (4.29.02)
Firing of 3 Resident Assistants for party in dorms. (9.19.02)
Makeup of Student Conduct Committee on Hernandez hearings (9.29.02)
Internal Daily Cal Rebellion (10.30.02)
BCR President forced to resign (11.02.02)
Berkeley Mayoral Candidate caught trashing papers (11.04.02)
Office of Student Life investigates Rally Committee Axe Parade (12.05.02)
Stabbing at Top Dog (2.19.03)
Internal struggle in the Student Advocate Office (2.20.03)
Wheeler occupied by Protestors (3.5.03)
Eric Schewe elected new Daily Cal EIC (4.12.03)
ASUC Elections thrown into turmoil by incorrect voting (4.14.03)
Code violations by the Berkeley Jewish Journal (4.17.03)
Student Advocate Candidate disqualified from running (5.4.03)
Daily Cal suffers thefts after story on football player's arrest. (5.7.03)
Regents vote to increase student fees (7.17.03)
Lawsuit filed against Regents over fee increases (7.24.03)
Injunction against student fees fails in court (8.13.03)
Cal student fails to get enough signatures for Gubernatorial run (8.14.03)
Student sent to hospital by gang violence on Frat Row (8.21.03)
Student Advocate Office collaborating in absence of actual Student Advocate (8.21.03)
Had the only existing copy of the ASUC Budget for 4 months (8.28.03)
OSL Greek Advisor to resign (9.5.03)
BCR / OSL arguments over reserving Sproul steps for 9.11 memorial (9.9.03)
Swastikas scrawled in Leconte Hall (9.9.03)
GSIs to strike (10.01.03)
ACLU filing lawsuit against BCR for propaganda restrictions (10.10.03)
ASUC President arrested for fighting with police (10.19.03)
Administration interviewing students with low SATs (10.20.03)
Daily Cal to stay in Eshleman Hall (10.27.03)
Email This Post!

Berkeley Bowl's Unionization vote is today. Here's their last rally, with Regent Huerta in attendance.Email This Post!

I have JSU's side of the DAFKA/JSU argument. Their primary reasoning was that being JSU-affiliated meant your leadership had to be student-run, instead of being run by an older, non-student organizer. The two bylaws that broke were

a) Be formed, led and directed by Jewish students (a majority of whom attend U.C. Berkeley),” and “c) Not serve, primarily or exclusively, as a vehicle for non-student, community groups, organizations, or persons.”

JSU was willing to work with DAFKA to come up with a compromise. Instead, DAFKA started urging visitors to not donate to Berkeley Hillel, and stonewalled against changing their bylaws at all. Typical ineffective extremism-- the crux of the matter was changing leadership roles, but groups like DAFKA are unable to handle compromise or bending to an external requirement.

In any case, after DAFKA went nuclear, JSU voted to revoke affiliation with them, for the foreseeable future.Email This Post!

Word on the Street is that there's been a serious rift between the mainstream Jewish organizations, basically the Jewish Student Union and Hillel, and the extremely pro-Israel group DAFKA. DAFKA Organizer and non-student Lee Kaplan has gone public with a raft of accusations against JSU and Hillel.

What I hear this boils down is the mainstream Jewish organizations being tired of DAFKA's extremism and association with even more extreme groups. Their last two public activities were infiltrating a pro-Palestinian rally with mock suicide bombers and the dubious anti-semitism charges against an Iraqi Professor. More if I hear about it.

UPDATE: Here's DAFKA's side of the story. I wouldn't believe any of it.Email This Post!

Here's those Profiles that Berkeley was working on. Even given that these are self-selected to make the sub-1000 group look good, they still tend to confirm what has been suspected: Most are either athletes or English-Second-Language.

Actually, what should be examined is the relationship that the UC Outreach programs have with the Admissions people. Participating in an Outreach program gives you a big boost towards Admissions, something I haven't seen examined at all by the LA Times. How do you get involved in these programs? How much of a boost do they give you? How do they select candidates and how do they exercise influence in the Admissions office? If there's a smoking gun in this story, which I still doubt, it'll be if the Outreach programs turn out to be poorly regulated and arbitrary.... Email This Post!

I keep forgetting to post that the Daily Cal's Board (Board of Directors, not Editorial Board -clarification) voted to stay in Eshleman Hall. The primary consideration was apparently their shaky financial situation. The Board felt that on the not-uncommon days when they just can't make rent, the ASUC is more likely and has been more likely to allow extensions and missed deadlines. Whereas a private renter would be legally allowed and likely to kick them out after missing one month's rent.

This isn't a bad argument, although I don't know why Ned's would be so quick to boot out a big tenant like the Daily Cal would be. Who else would fill that space? Things like this can be worked out in advance.

In addition, the Daily Cal is really hampering their ability to cover earthquakes in the Bay Area. If there is one, they'll all be dead. Eshleman is an earthquake deathtrap. I'm looking forward, some years down the line, to reading the inevitable recriminations that come after numerous students are killed by its' toppling.

Also, the Daily Cal is not helping their own consistency on maintaining independence. First the DC cries foul when the ASUC meddles with their Rent Agreement. 'We're just a private, independent business! Political considerations should not be a factor in business negotiations. Don't meddle in our neutrality!'

And then they turn around when rent falls short and say 'We're the campus paper! It's a goal of yours to support student groups and maintain a student-run newspaper. Take this into consideration!'

You can't only be the important campus paper when it's politically convenient and get away with it.Email This Post!

Bears stomp hapless Wildcats, 42-14

Recap...

Email This Post!

Email This Post!

Here's the LA Times story with me in it.

For many on campus, the growing debate over who should be admitted bears little resemblance to the battles over free speech or other movements that have roiled this activist community in the past. The issues are muddier, more complex — and many of the relevant facts, for now, remain under wraps.

"There's not enough information," said Kevin Deenihan, 21, a senior economics major who runs a Web log for campus news. "It's still pretty vague."

I like the implication that if we really understood what was going on, we'd actually care. What I actually meant was that the LA Times is clearly pushing harder then their own knowledge. All we know is SAT information, a now-minor part of total admissions and a poor measurement in any case. 'Muddier?' 'More Complex?' How about LESS Complex-- in that this is a very predictable result of Comprehensive Admissions. And it's much less complex then the fight over Affirmative Action, over Free Speech, and so on, mostly because this is a marginal result to an Admissions process that basically ensured these results in advance.

Oh well. I felt bad for the Reporters. They were sent up to write the text for the headline 'Students really care about LA Times story.' But this is of no interest to non-political students; they were admitted! This was a good result for pro-aff. am. students, who are hardly inclined to complain. The Republicans are a bit teed, but they have more important battles to fight. I suggested that a better story would be 'Students lose interest in Admissions battles,' but it didn't fly. It is, of course, possible that there will be a furor if this leads to a push to ditch Comprehensive Admissions, but we aren't there yet, and I doubt we ever will be.

Word on the street is that some more LAT Reporters are poking around Berkeley, trying to find the people admitted with low SATs. They're also following up on the story I broke a few days ago about the Administration interviewing some of the students admitted with low SATs.Email This Post!

Intriguing that 'University of California' is the number one giver to the Dean campaign-- and that other Universities also dominate the top 20. (Link via Clam.Email This Post!

*Breaking*

Word on the street is that the Administration has been quietly interviewing members of the 400 students admitted with low SAT scores. They're checking to make sure the students do in fact merited getting in. And word also is that the Administration is satisfied with what the interviews are telling them.

In related news, the LA Times was here this weekend to get 'the student reaction' to the 400 admittances story. I basically told them that no one here cares. I think this is essentially accurate. Email This Post!

The Computer Science and Business Association has been quietly but enthusiastically coming up with superb utilities for students. First they created Final Distance, the gold standard in schedule management, and now they've compiled 'UCB Live,' an event-finder. Lots of neat features.

These are masterminded by Patrick Shyu, who also came up with the infamous Berkeley Hot or Not.Email This Post!

Cal Football Update
Even with Aaron Rodgers making up for his lackluster performance against OSU with today's 28 completions, 0 interceptions, and 322 yards, the California Golden Bears lost to the UCLA Bruins 23-20 in OT. [recap] After the Bears stumbled over themselves repeatedly through most of the game, including one missed and two blocked field goals, Rodgers led a fierce fourth quarter rally to tie the game with a touchdown and two-point conversion in the last two minutes; unfortunately, a Fredrickson 50-yard field goal attempt bounced off the goal post in OT and sealed the game for the Bruins.

The Golden Bears (3-5, 1-2 Pac-10) will host the Arizona Wildcats (1-6, 0-3 Pac-10) next Saturday, October 25th, at Memorial Stadium. Kickoff is at 12:30pm.Email This Post!

Email This Post!

The IFC announces that it has hired a rent-a-cop for presence during the more social days of the week. He will patrol frat row Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday 11p - 5a. He has no power of arrest but a direct line to the BPD and a presence that can deter Berkeley's more brutish elements. This will be useful when frats wants to get rid of high school hooligans but are afraid of the cops busting them for inevitably illegal actions of their own. For the number, contact the president of a Greek house. This may be the most worthwhile thing the IFC has ever done, (not that there is much competition).Email This Post!

Last week the Office of Student Life cleared Michael Grey of all charges in the incident last Spring when a Fraternity Brother in Pi Kappa Phi got his head broken open by someone. Several members of Pi Kapp identified the culprit as Mr. Grey, but OSL's final word was 'the witnesses did not identify Grey clearly as the aggressor in the altercation.'

What was OSL looking for? A videotape? Was Mr. Grey not identified as being there at all, or not identified as the one that broke someone's head? Were there any other suspects that were let go? Why is all this being kept from the Brothers in Pi Kappa Phi who were attacked? And why weren't the ones who testified believed? Is it, just maybe, because Pi Kapp has a reputation for 'causing trouble?'

The secrecy with which OSL has conducted these proceedings has made it impossible to either clear Mr. Grey completely, or at least to give the Greek system some confidence that this wasn't being hushed under the rug on someone's behalf. Now there's nothing but unanswered questions.

The Daily Cal's coverage of this has been disgraceful. I prodded them all summer to do a followup; I knew that they knew information that would've moved this story along. The only DC story was the lame 'Grey cleared of Criminal charges' story that was a month old. Instead, it's all been neatly let go, and whoever rushed en masse into a Fraternity, beat the occupants up, and rushed out, will be getting away. There aren't even any new safety measures to give some comfort this won't happen again. What will it take? Someone getting shot? Someone nearly got shot this time.

A very proud moment all around.Email This Post!

I had neglected to mention that there's a new Student Comics magazine-- Bezerk. It's largely anime-inspired, with some notable exceptions. An interesting read.

I'd love to get some of their artists do Squelch illustration work on the side. Interested? E-mail me.

What really impressed me about Bezerk was their level of business organization. In the short time they've existed, they've already evolved an aggressive advertising division, have distributed just about everywhere you could possible imagine, and have an excellent website. This is in contrast with the vast majority of campus magazines, which mostly suckle at the teat of the ASUC and do a half-assed job getting ads.

In other publications news, some members of my Fraternity put together a Libertarian magazine, the Practical Idealist. It also looks like Satellite is trying to make a come back. Email This Post!

The latest issue of the Squelch is out today. Look for it on Sproul. Email This Post!

UPDATE: For some reason, the Daily Cal doesn't mention that the 'business on Durant' that President Primm ducked into was Kip's.

The details of President Primm's arrest are out. Worse then I could imagine! I had thought the rumors of him fighting with five or six police after running away from them were too sensational to be true...

when the officers attempted to issue an "open container" citation, Cuaresma-Primm allegedly took off running, discarded the beverage and ducked into a business on Durant Avenue.

Officers escorted Cuaresma-Primm from the business and after a brief struggle in which one arresting officer suffered minor injuries, Cuaresma-Primm was detained and transferred into a police car, Curtin said.

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS: Why did President Primm run? An open container citation is not a big deal. Was he too drunk? Or, as one commentator asked, was he doing something more incriminating?

Why did he fight with cops? Again, too drunk? Possible. Did the cops go after him first? Again possible, but more unlikely then some seem to think. Don't forget that President Primm is a former track star and is generally pretty big. And standard police procedure would not have additional cops on the scene just hanging around while two-three others were struggling to arrest him. Your goal is to arrest him, not to have a fair fight!

Political effects? Everything and nothing, I would say. Inside the ASUC, this will have little to no effect besides some eye-rolling. But outside of it? The Presidency is one of the few positions with an institutionalized access to the Administration. President Primm meets with the Chancellor AND is on the Committee to select a new one! How much influence will he have with the Administration and Faculty once this gets out?
Email This Post!

**BREAKING**

Multiple sources have told me that ASUC President Primm was arrested over the weekend. According to sources, the President was at Kips when he was arrested for Drinking in Public.

UPDATE: One more confirmation. Looks like the entire campus saw our President being hauled off.

**MORE AS IT COMES IN**
**THIS IS STILL GOSSIP**
**BUT VERY INTERESTING**Email This Post!

UPDATE: Despite the vote, memebrs seem resolved not to take this action, electing rather, to focus on the fact that BCR searched people's backpacks to remove opposing literature, even that which was not intended to be distributed.

BACLU vs. BCR

A cadre of action-craving Berkeley ACLU members will bring charges against the Berkeley College Republicans, the club voted Tuesday. The aim is to revoke a portion of BCR's ASUC funding for allegedly oppressing freedom of speech of dissenters at a Ward Connerly event they hosted (the lawsuit is before ASUC Judicial committee).

On September 23 BCR brought the regent and author of Proposition 54 to speak on the matter, and forbade those in attendance from bringing in signs of any nature. Buttons, T-shirts, etc. were allowed, but on at least one occasion, opposing literature was confiscated out of a backpack. BACLU also voted to seek to disallow clubs from such confiscations through the OSL, but this is not the priority.

The co-presidents of BACLU read disapprovingly on a flier that signs would not be permitted, and after consulting with lawyers at the Northern California affiliate of the ACLU, decided to become their own test case. A dozen of the BACLU brought 11" x 17" anti-54 placards, demanding admission. After arguments and legal threats, they were denied. Following contentious debate, the vote to go through with the lawsuit passed by a small margin, although many members question its validity (they were not told that the lawsuit intends to revoke funding at the time of voting) and there is still chance for a revote.

Here is how one member expressed support:

Public funds and facilities may not be used to promote or facilitate events which do not grant equal access to members of the public (or on a more strict interpretation, members of the UCB student population). . . When granted permission to use campus facilities they are not granted a corresponding right to deny access to people simply based on the fact that they intend to practice forms of speech which are protected (non-disruptive). This is not altered in any way by that fact the they were distributing tickets.

...university policy may not restrict on campus speech in public arenas (including facilities opened to "dialogue" with faculty of the University [e.g. Regents]). It is a valid inference, and clear provision of legal precedence, that school funded groups holding events which are ostensibly to promote dialogue, are obliged not to limit the speech of others. . . . To deny admittance for the potential to cause a disruption is not a valid reason for a student group to limit the speech of individuals, even it they find it distasteful.

BCR members are shocked and thrilled, and with good reason. It appears unlikely the ACLU will win this case, and it may provide fodder for those types who wuv the fact there are conservatives in Berkeley.

For at least the time being, I have excised my commentary on the matter for fear of editorializing too soon. I retract nothing though.Email This Post!

The newest issue of the Berkeley Mic is out. Same with Hardboiled and Onyx Express.Email This Post!

UPDATE: ACLU People have conclusively proved that this has nothing to do with the BCR/ASUC flap. I apologize for the inorrect insinuation.

Rumor Mill:

An ASUC Senator who really should pay more attention to Disclosure rules tells me that the ASUC/GA is very seriously considering a lawsuit against the Administration.

Also, the Berkeley ACLU is poised to sue BCR for attacking their friends in the ASUC... whoops! Ha ha, I mean they're suing them because BCR refused to allow signs to be brought in to the Connerly speech. I really have no idea what kind of argument they could make. No ASUC money was used. I'm sure the close ties between ACLU and CalSERVE over Prop 54 matters has nothing to do with this.Email This Post!

Connerly: 14 more years!

Something no one seemed to consider! Regent Connerly-- the ever-lasting bete noire of Progressives-- will have his term expire in March 1, 2005. Pretty soon! Why can't -- and wouldn't -- Governor Arnold reappoint him to a 14 year term? It's not like Mr. Connerly has anything better to do...

I voted:

No on Recall
Georgy Russell for Gov
No on 54
No on 53

More as it comes in! Email This Post!

Here's the full text of the op-ed that ran a week or so ago regarding the ASUC/GA's position. The Daily Cal cut it considerably. Too bad, when the full explication of the GA/ASUC's position is so important in judging what to do next.

Free Speech Movement: Forty Years Later

By ASUC President Kris Cuaresma-Primm, Graduate Assembly Academic Affairs
Vice President Temina Madon, Catherine Ahn, Law Student Delegate

Whether you support or oppose Proposition 54, the Graduate Assembly’s recent censure by the UC Berkeley administration for funding a “No on Prop 54” student group should concern you.

The GA’s allocation of funds for lobbying activities is entirely legal.

But questioning that allocation undermines students’ rights to exercise authority over their own fees. Graduate students, undergrads, and faculty across campus should be worried that individuals are challenging student rights guaranteed by the US Supreme Court.

Yesterday, the UC Berkeley administration requested that the UC Office of the President’s General Counsel investigate alleged Graduate Assembly violations of UC policy governing student group funding.

We argue that our government’s allocation abides by the “University of California Guidelines for Funding Registered Campus Organizations and Related Programmatic Activities by Compulsory Student Fees.

Policies noted by representatives of the Daily Cal, namely the UC Policy on Student Governments (80.00), are obsolete because they have been superseded by court cases, including a Supreme Court case, affirming the right of student governments to fund politically partisan activities.

Outdated campus policies have not been amended to recognize the provisions of the Southworth v. University of Wisconsin Supreme Court case of 2000. This case, along with more recent guidelines published by UCOP, undeniably protect the right of student governments to take positions on issues and, more importantly, to devote funds to promoting those positions. Indeed, the UCOP guidelines reflecting the Smith v. Regents and Rosenberger v. Rector decisions state that, “official student lobbying activities on student-related matters may be funded by compulsory student fees available to such student governments.

Furthermore, these same guidelines provide for the funding of organizations considered to be political, religious, or ideological in nature. Examples of these organizations include any group that “supports or sponsors ballot initiatives, candidates seeking election, or other political purposes.” The guidelines further state that students who object to the positions represented by these groups “are entitled to a pro rata refund.”

University policy could not read any more clearly.

The decision by the delegates to the Graduate Assembly to fund Proposition 54 activities was the product of a transparent and democratic process, not of the particular views of its executives (who do not vote on allocation of funds). By challenging the allocation of funds by the Graduate Assembly, our democratic process is undermined.

We urge the student body to carefully evaluate this issue. Failing to engage in thoughtful examination of the facts could result in a substantial weakening not only of our student governments, but also of student governments nationwide.

The power that we currently hold has been gained through decades of steadfast work by scores of student leaders. That power is too precious not to protect.

Email This Post!

GA: A New Hope

Have I been looking at the GA/ASUC's tactics the wrong way this entire time? I've been preceding on the assumption that there was no way the UC Administration was going to allow the no-on-54 reimbursements. Maybe I'm wrong! Word on the street is that they're still considering whether or not to allow it. (Same source tells me the amount needing reimbursement is in the 'thousands.')

The crux of the matter is the UC regulations on student governments. They're not entirely against this spending. Essentially, students are allowed to lobby against political matters of an educational nature. But when I say they're 'not entirely against it,' what I mean is that they're a hopeless mess of interpretations. Some lobbying is allowed. But it needs to be educational. And viewpoint neutral. And it can't be political. Heck, it even looks like if 54 was a bill in the legislature it'd be more legal to lobby against it then the proposition version. Why should that be? Go through it yourself... nothing is clear.

Anyway, the sum of this is that you could plausibly argue for or against the anti-54 spending. On balance, it leans against the spending, especially because of the vague nature of where the money actually went and the more-illegal fact of Eshleman being used to lobby against 54.... but this is not the point!

The point is that if UC declares that the regulations DO protect the GA/ASUC spending, they can probably get away with it! That might be why the ASUC/GA has been so zealously compiling those Court decisions-- if UC declares that the spending is legal under their guidelines, all of them become a lot more applicable. Then all you have to worry about is a possible PLF lawsuit, which can probably be fended off with some adroit rebranding of the GA as more of a student group then a government and labeling 54 as a threat to Graduate Student research needs. It would probably work! Not only that, but you get the added bonus of having the University acknowledge that this kind of politicized spending is basically fine.

Is this what the ASUC/GA has been pushing for behind the scenes this entire time? It's the only way that their actions make sense to me.

Email This Post!

Cal Football Update

Although Adimchinobe Echemandu put on a show with his third 100-yard game (146 yards on 19 carries today), Cal didn't have enough to defeat the Oregon State Beavers, and lost 35-21. [recap] Other highlights from the game included a 72 yard interception return by freshman cornerback Daymeion Hughes to score Cal's first touchdown.

The Golden Bears (3-4, 1-1 Pac-10) take this week off, and will play their next game in Los Angeles against the UCLA Bruins (currently 3-2, 1-0 Pac-10) on October 18th. Kickoff time is TBA.

As was evident in today's game, Cal is definitely missing the presence of star reciever Jonathan Makonnen, who has been sidelined for the rest of the season after surgery earlier this week to repair a stress fracture of his left foot. [more]Email This Post!

Email This Post!

More Union correspondance from Calstuff Correspondant GSI:

> The UAW Local 2865 Bargaining Team has called for a 1 day unfair labor practice strike at all UC campuses on Friday, October 3, to protest the University of California's continuing pattern of unfair labor practices in our contract negotiations.

Striking means we don't perform any of our assigned work duties including teaching, consulting with students about class work, and emailing or posting assignments. It also means not making up "struck work" later in the term.

UAW Local 2865 members should report to the main picket site at Telegraph and Bancroft from 7:30 am to 5 pm. We are encouraging people to go on campus and demand the services that aren't there because of the strike over UC's
unfair labor practices
.
Finally, if your department communicates anything to you concerning this strike, it is vital that you forward it to the Union office (agseuaw@earthlink.net). For more information, contact the Union office (510-549-3863).

It'll be interesting to see turnout. I've had one TA cancel Office Hours for today already. But I've also seen complaints from several GSIs that the Union does a terrible job of communicating with them, and indeed, they have no idea exactly what they're striking about.Email This Post!