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!