Friday, May 5.:
OPINION
swtestfo
r est Nile
icephaliti
NDON (AP)—Anewtes
tsc encephalitis caused by
lito-bome West Nile virus ft
■d the New York City areal;
)uld identify victims fastera
t which ones are likely tods
ahers say.
enlists at the University off
at Irv ine report in this wed
)f The Lancet r
e test, which looks for the
naterial of the virus inspir;
also could spare somepeop
asive brain biopsiesperfoii ^
ic encephalitis patients,
st Nile virus, transmitted
litoes, is commonly found
. I astern Lurope, WestAaftors
e Middle East. It had ne\i
documented in the Westet
phere before last Aueie
t surfaced in New York
hat outbreak, 62 peoplecais
with severe encephalitisar:
others died. No reliableer
are available for thefiumbei
af West Nile encephalitis Ik
worldwide.
eral viruses and bacteriacr
encephalitis, an inflammatii:|
brain. Medication is avail;
ne types of encephalitis, h
icrs, such as West Nile virus
determine whether encepha!
; caused by the West Nile yi
ther virus that can betreatd
s send blood samples toal;'
/ to be tested for antibodies,
s that takes days. Iftheysm
ie illness is caused by the he
Friday. May 5. 2000
THE BATTALION
Page 15
EDITORIAL
FHE
nr'iri
ditorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the majority
view of the editorial board members. They do not necessar
ily reflect the opinions of other Battalion staff members,
the Texas A&M student body, regents, administration, fac
ulty or staff. Columns, guest columns, cartoons and
'etters express the opinions of the authors.
Editorial Board
BEVERLY MIRELES
MANAGING EDITOR
STUART HUTSON
CAMPUS EDITOR
ERIC DICKENS
OPINION EDITOR \
KYLE WHITACRE
AGGIELIFE EDITOR
DOUG SHILLING
SPORTS EDITOR
JASON BENNYHOFF
RADIO PRODUCER
JEFF KEIVIPF
NIGHT NEWS EDITOR
MARIUM MOHIUDDIN
EDITOR IN CHIEF
MEREDITH MIGHT
COMMUNITY EDITbR
MARIANO CASTILLO
OPINION EDITOR
VERONICA SERRANO
AGGIELIFE EDITOR
DAVE AMBER
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR
JASON LINCOLN
ASST. SPORTS EDITOR
NONI SRIDHARA
ASST. RADIO PRODUCER
CRISTINA PADRON
ASST. NIGHT NEWS EDITOR
GUY ROGERS
PHOTO EDITOR
RUBEN DELUNA
GRAPHICS EDITOR
BRANDON PAYTON
WES MASTER
JP BEATO
PHOTO EDITOR .
GABRIEL RUENES
ASST. GRAPHICS EDITOR
BRENT BARKLEY
ASST WEB MASTER
TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR BONFIRE
uture bonfire plans should wait for Aggies, Aggie culture to mature
Aggie Bonfire should not burn again until Aggie
culture, as described in the Special Commission on
e 1999 Aggie Bonfire Final Report, evolves into a
mind-set capable of responsibly and professionally
overseeing the construction of a safe structure.
According to the report, one of the major fac-
that led to the collapse of the 1999 Aggie
Bonfire were norms in Texas A&M culture that al
lowed structural flaws and irresponsible behavior
to go unquestioned. A&M President Dr. Ray M.
Bowen and bonfire student leaders were content
with the report’s thoroughness and will analyze
the findings before a decision on the fate of bon
fire is made in June.
While structural problems can be fixed with a new
design, Aggie culture cannot be changed overnight.
It will take time and reflection for Aggies to overcome
the barrier of "tunnel vision.”
Unfortunately, there is plenty of evidence to show
the cultural bias at A&M remains unchanged. Dur
ing the release of the report in Reed Arena, students
displayed immaturity by whooping and hissing at cer
tain comments and questions.
When chairman Leo Linbeck Jr. announced that
alcohol and excessive horseplay were not causal
factors of the collapse, the crowd’s childish collec
tive whoop of approval was transmitted on national
news. Instead of listening to criticisms that led to
the collapse, the crowd rudely hissed.
Should Bowen decide to continue bonfire, the
student body should not be supportive if the cul
tural bias that indirectly led to the collapse does
not change.
At a forum with Vice President of Student Affairs
J. Malon Southerland, students promised to coop
erate in any way for bonfire to burn in 2000, includ
ing doing away with hazing and alcohol that were cit
ed as problems in the report.
"We would be willing to (Ho whatever it takes ...
as long as we can build it and as long as we can
burn it in November,” a student pleaded to
Southerland.
Yet, reports of crew chiefs passing their pots
down despite instructions from bonfire adviser
Rusty Thompson leave little hope that the hazing rit
uals and alcohol associated with bonfire will disap
pear immediately.
Right now, current and former students are mak
ing very emotional remarks and have high expecta
tions of future bonfires.
However, it would further perpetuate tunnel vision
if bonfire is not placed on hiatus until the Aggie cul
ture has changed to create an environment where
a safe bonfire can be built.
rus, they also might cuto.
irain tissue for testing. A hh, the smell
■ new test, adapted Iromsinil ZA °l partie in
;ed for other diseases, diagnose; j T Ltheair. As
ile encephalitis in victimsoi¥ I another dead week
New York outbreak withinii«| ro"s into Aggieland,
said the study’s leader, Dr, la: | a morb id series of
. director of the emergingdis- circumstances can
aboratory at UC-lrvine. ' come ,0 8 e ^ er ' n a
...aTLia lethal combination.
1 First, college stu-
A lesson learned
Missed deadlines present
chance for redemption
A
A
ur
GO
4*
dents, a demographic not known for nor
mal sleeping patterns, feel the effects of a
| semester spent frequently forsaking sleep
for fun, games and occasional studying.
Next., give these red-eyed students com
prehensive final exams or massive end-of-
semester projects. Lastly, the last week of
the semester means deadlines and due
dates are even more final — Q-drops are
long-forgotten get-out-of-jail-free cards.
All these elements put together create a
stressful situation that many students ex
perience first-hand. Many students have
found themselves in the predicament of
meeting with professors in their offices
and calling them at home after missing fi
nals or failing to turn in final projects.
These student slip-ups put everybody
in a difficult position. Students are
ashamed or burdened with guilt for miss
ing their deadlines, and teachers are faced
with punishing students who are usually
truly repentant.
As awful as this scenario is, certain
benefits can be reaped by both parties.
Students are in college to learn and profes
sors to teach — in these desperate situa
tion, lessons that are not taught in any col
lege textbook can be learned and taught.
Students begging professors to let
them make up missed finals or to accept
?r l £ U
[SUMMER II)
■»)
VM - 3PM
rmation
rUtivi ar«r ©ffervd by the
er or difabiUtiL
late term papers might
want to take a moment
to reflect before getting
off their knees. Besides
learning about humility
and fallibility, they get
another dose of one of
the oldest lessons in
college. Every under
graduate has heard of
the dangers of procras
tination, but most seem
to forget those dangers
and continue to put off
assignments.
Missed final assign
ments are slaps to the
face which tell students
that procrastination is
one bad habit they can
not afford to let die hard.
As for professors,
they can simply choose
to ^old class in the
school of hard knocks by
refusing to let students
make up missed assign
ment and giving them an ‘F.’ However, if
they do not immediately turn their backs to
desperate undergraduates, professors get
the opportunity to show that teaching is not
just about grades and papers.
Being an outstanding professor at an in
stitution of higher education means doing
more than just doling out letter grades — it
means mentoring and helping students
with their troubles, even when they screw
up. Professors are not students’ mommies,
but for those willing to accept a higher
calling, end-of-the-year mistakes are excel
lent opportunities to fulfill that role.
r—
4 o
c
"!
J (" ’ °
l\A v ^|V
° |
Me
rivy *
Of course, all this worry and trouble
can be avoided if students take the respon
sibility to stay on top of their assignments.
Nonetheless, term papers are handed in
late and finals get slept through.
Students missing deadlines should be
prepared to fail the class and approach their
professors with honesty —- most likely it is
way too late for butt-kissing, and time to
simply tell them exactly what happened.
On the other side of the lectern, profes
sors should think back to their own days as
undergraduates and have a modicum of
sympathy for students. Failing a student
for his or her mistake is the easy lesson —
RUBEN DELUNA/The Battalion
one that teaches a student to respect dead
lines out of fear of punishment. But no lec
ture stands out as strong in students’ minds
as the time they see a professor work with
them to correct a hopeless situation.
Dead week can kill a student’s pride.
Missing a final or due date can give a stu
dent a blow while giving the professor the
chance to demonstrate what it really means
to be a teacher.
There are many lessons to be learned in
college — how to be a mentor is one that
professors can still learn.
Eric Dickens is a junior English major.
VIEW POiNTS
Student evaluations should
have say in professor pay
O ne of the worst things college students have to
deal with is tenured professors. While many pro
fessors with tenure are also blessed with genuine
personality and the ability to relate to students, far too
many professors are not. Frankly, many of them suck as
teachers. However, they have tenure, so they cannot easily
be fired, and student evaluations, while they may contain
strong words, do not give some professors adequate in
centive to do better.
This problem can be fixed quite easily by tying profes
sors’ salaries to' student evaluations. Professors could be
guaranteed half of their salaries. The other half would be
adjusted based on how well or how poorly students evalu
ated the professor — a good evaluation would bring in the
base salary, a bad evaluation would bring in a small pay
:ut and a very good evaluation would mean a bonus.
Many administrators would certainly worry about this
ystem. They feel professors would be intimidated at the
irospect of losing money and would cater to students by
making classes easier. They feel students who dislike the
Professor would use this opportunity to hurt him or her in
the pocketbook. This is exactly the point.
Those who feel this program would degrade the quali
ty of education at Texas A&M are forgetting two vital
facts. The first is that college students are responsible
adults and are generally fair. The second is that the only
professors who would be feeling the bite of a bad evalua
tion are the ones who are such bad teachers that they re
ceive bad evaluations. The good professors will be unaf
fected or will receive bonuses.
Admittedly, some classes are simply difficult and will
need to be hard. To that end, a review board would have to be
established, but it should be a student review board. Appeals
concerning pay cuts could go to the board, where an impar
tial panel of students would determine if the professor’s poor
evaluations were a result of bad teaching or bad students.
Yes, this plan will scare away some potential faculty. It
will also appeal to potential faculty who would love to
make extra money from their excellent teaching. In the
end, the University comes out on top.
The curse of many college students is the professor
who is brilliant in his or her field, but so socially inept or
so wrapped up in his or her research that teaching is actu
ally a burden. Texas A&M is an institution of higher
learning. It must fttlfill its primary mission — teaching —
before it even begins to worry about reputation or re
search. Giving professors incentive to teach well is the
ideal method for improving teaching.
— Chris Huffines
Napster’s end initiated with
decision of Metallica lawsuit
M etallica’s lawsuit against Napster is.the begin
ning of the end for the MP3-swapping software
company. On Wednesday, Napster Inc. an
nounced that it may block over 300,000 users who share
NRA shooting
blanks with bad
public relations
NICHOLAS
ROZNOVSKY
Metallica songs. By getting a list of individual users, the
band is leading the way to render Napster useless.
Napster has no choice but to ban these users, but it will
set a precedent that w ill likely end up with other artists suing
for copyright infringement. The software thrives by helping
people steal from artists and deserves to be disabled.
From a legal standpoint, Napster would make the right
decision by pulling those members, but at the same time
would invite other irate artists to follow Metallica’s lead.
Until the suit, Napster was relatively safe from getting in
trouble since it only facilitates the song trading and is not
responsible for what its users trade. However, the fact that
Metallica is naming specific users leaves Napster little
choice but to boot them.
Metallica is doing the music world a favor by making the
common crime of pirating songs over the Internet di fficult to
get away with.Before Metallica got the specific names,
users felt no guilt for downloading and sharing copyrighted
songs. Now, cyber-pirates risk being monitored.
It may seem like an invasion of privacy to some, but it
was only a matter of time before a band would take the
initiative to catch people illegally trading its music.
Anyone who has used Napster knows that it primarily
serves as an MP3 cartel more than a place to share indie
music. Users have no right to complain that their ring was
finally broken.
Napster’s decision will have an effect on other law
suits that are in the works. Rumors are circulating that Dr.
Dre may also get lists with users names. Artists who have
been ripped off since Napster went online are getting the
payback they deserve.
— Mariano Castillo
Sensationalistic
infomercials
and cheesy
celebrity
endorsements
are not the best
way for the
nation's largest
lobby of gun
owners to
approach the
gun control issue.
R ecently, it has been nearly impossi
ble to read a newspaper or turn on
the evening news without seeing
some mention of the National Rifle Associ
ation (NRA) and its continued efforts to
support its interpretation of the Second
Amendment.
Whether a story covering the war of
words being waged between President
Clinton and NRA Executive Vice Presi
dent Wayne LaPierre or an advertisement featuring Karl Mal
one holding a gun and letting everyone know that he “is the
NRA” is presented the NRA has obviously made a concerted
effort to bring its message back to the forefront of American
political debate.
NRA membership is still strong, but members are going about
fighting the gun control debate the wrong way
Instead of approaching the debate in a logical manner, the
NRA is convinced that its cause must be fueled by the fear and
anger of the public. In truth, it is ignoring the most crucial compo
nent of the battle — the minds of the American people.
To expand its media presence, the NRA has entered the realm
of Dionne Warwick, George Foreman and Ron Popeil — the world
ofhalf-hour infomercials. Now, at three o’clock in the morning,
the NRA preaches its doctrine on a variety of cable channels.
But to the average viewer, the NRA’s 30-minute infomercial
looks more like a news program than an advertisement.
Accompanied by a quickly scrolling message bar spouting
alarmist blurbs, a professionally dressed woman “reports” on the
travesty which has turned Australia and Canada into hellish
cesspools of crime and violence — gun control.
Although no one else seems to think so, apparently the Land
Down Under and the Great White North have been overrun by
thieves, rapists and murderers now that citizens are not allowed to :
walk the streets packing heat. The NRA tells its viewers that
crime scenes with murder victims being carted into ambulances
are common occurrences on the nightly news in these countries.
Some Australians, they reveal, have become so afraid for their
personal safety they have even installed security systems in iheir
very own homes!
And all of these problems are headed towards the United
States, the NRA warns. The infomercial does not acknowledge that
these conditions already exist in America, but spends its time fos
tering fears of anarchy and lawlessness in its late-night audience.
For those who are not swayed by purely reactionary fear, the
NRA pulls out its big gun at the end of the infomercial: For just a
small yearly fee, viewers can join the NRA, defend their right to
own firearms, and most importantly, get a really neat silver bullet
keychain and framed pic
ture of NRA President
Charlton Heston.
Yes, if sensationalism
and panic are not enough to
reel in new members, the
NRA figures that the appeal
of “Moses” himself will
seal the deal. Like Ron
Popeil extolling the virtues
of his newest kitchen appli
ance, Heston launches into
a cheesy appeal to the
viewers for their dollars.
Full of hokey cliches and
shameless attempts to asso
ciate N RA membership
with patriotism and right
eousness, Heston’s speech
is so blatantly commercial
ized that it cannot be taken
seriously as an appeal to ra
tional minds.
Sensationalistic infomercials and cheesy celebrity endorse
ments are not the best way for the nation’s largest lobby of gun-
owners to approach the gun control issue. It would seem that
such an important issue would merit a more serious and intelli
gent method of debate.
Unfortunately, the NRA cannot seem to break away from
its history of using melodramatic tactics to reach out to the
American public.
Just seven years ago, NRA magazine ads depicting federal
agents as jackbooted Nazi thugs were enough to cause former
President George Bush to cancel his NRA membership. Earlier
this year, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre faced
public backlash after he accused President Clinton of perpetuating
violence in America. It seems that the NRA cannot get enough of
the free publicity its sensational methods produce.
Regardless of one’s position on the issue of gun control, it is
obvious that the NRA is no longer interested in discussing the .
issue itself. Instead, the organization has turned the debate into
a crusade. Armed with inflammatory statements and conspiracy-
theories, the NRA has set its sights on stopping any form of guti
control.
Both gun control advocates and opponents would benefit if the-
NRA would abandon its alarmist strategy and actually discuss the -
implications of limited gun control. That does not mean its view
point should be abandoned, but rather the NRA should examine
the way it expresses itself and consider appearing to listen to the 1
other side of the debate.
Gun control and personal safety are serious issues. They de
serve grown-up debate, not childish name-calling and mindless
accusations. While the NRA may feel that any publicity is good
publicity, its sensationalistic methods stifle debate on gun control
and alienate a large section of the public.
If the NRA wants to win the gun control debate, it needs to
stop pandering to the cameras and give Americans something they
can think about. The NRA may feel as if it is hitting the opposi
tion where it hurts, but it is really just shooting itself in the foot.
Nicholas Roznovsky is a junior political science major.