The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, August 11, 2003, Image 5

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    DST & FOUND
jund 7/21 near New Main
ntersection. Contact Jay
Accurate description required.
PETS
s: Dogs, Cats, Puppies, Kd-
1 purebreds. Brazos Animal
5-5755, www.shelterpets.org
IEAL ESTATE
•O 3/2, huge deck, S32.M0
-est In Oak Creek. 696-7596.
?OOM MATES
nate! for GREAT 3/2 house,
1/3bills. CONVENIENT to
iAUTIFUL park. Jenny, 512-
f first month’s rent! Brand
>a townhouse. Canyon Creel,
rmmates, on shuttle, $450/mo,
-702-0495.
2bdrm apartment. $247/mo,t
1-6293.
20/mo. +electricity, 3txt/3ba ai
Apartments, great livingl 979-
jplex available August lit.
/2bills. Fenced yard, big clos-
I ceiling. 979-240-3034, Kris-
I for 3/2 townhouse, on bus
/mo, 817-517-4023.
ate needed. 3bdmn/3ba Zoos
S345/mo. -t-water, -t-electricity,
ter, pool, gated, & courts. 956-
late wanted, Han/ey tom
5 $350/mo +1/2 utilities. 693-
rate wanted. 2/1 duplei
-1/2bills. Water paid, pets
!025.
ed. S450/mo. +1/3bills. Ne»
Very nice. Please call 979
reeded, $350/mo. +1/3-elec,
re (everything else paid). Cal
03-780-8319.
ommate needed for 3/2 house
i. Call Julie 764-4333.
late wanted, University Com-
'mo. Available August 1, year
38-3446.
mate needed. 3/2 house on
No pets. $320/mo. +1/3ui-
10.
-smoking $250/mo +1/3biis
louse, fenced yard, pets o.k
ling nearby. 25-minutes noitt
>79-589-2466.
s needed, brand new 3/3 du-
id yard, security system, Cal
39.
is paid, furnished 4bdrm/2ba
home. W/D-freezer, $375,
-774-1510.
oommates needed, 3bd/2ba
lished on bus-route, no pets,
deposit, +1/3utilities. 680-
d for 3bdrm/2ba in new Bp
aion close to Blinn. $375/mo.
iile 979-777-2297.
u 3bdrm/2ba/2gar house. I-
’AMU. W/D. $385/mo. Call
7; 281-388-0519.
imates needed. 3/2 duple*,
', close to campus, $275/™.
ill John 979-220-5289,
s for 4bdrm/2bth house in
ard. Call 218-5734,
es needed for 4bdrm/4.5ba
'03. Nice, spacious, close to
EB. Fully furnished, except
$380/mo, Contact Cindy®
19-441-6927.
two-story, swimming pod,
lunity. $450/mo +1/3MIS,
1 or earlier, non-smoking
or 4/3 new home, 904 Bou-
d, $400/mo. +1/4utilities. Cal
396-0766.
mate needed ASAP. 3/2 du-
spring, pets o.k., stables for
mo, 778-5713.
imate needed. For August
obile home. $275/mo. +1/3-
96-2119.
mate wanted. 333/mo, 3/2.5
jets allowed, on bus route.
:ed for 3/3 townhouse with
king, blocks from TAMU,
/3util. 979-694-0952, 512-
ig roommate needed for 3/3
ne, furnished, w/d, parking,
/Sutil. (979)764-9032 or
0.
e, non-smoker. 2/1.5 $265
Available 9/1/03, call 691-
ite needed ASAP. 1 block
224-1071
. 1-F, 3bdrm/2ba. $375/mo.
ew house. Call Lauren 680-
seded to take over 2/2 du-
N/D conn., yard, bus-route,
9)220-3487.
aeded! M/F-preferred. Bills
o. 3/2/2 W/D, yard, broad-
iving areas, on bus route,
el 822-3908.
leeded for a new 3bd/2ba
Aerofit. nice landscape
em, W/D, microwave, etc.
reeded for nice 3bdrm/2ba
dose to campus, W/D,
urnished or unfurnished.
Christian Roommates
4utilities. New 4bd/3ba
5.
ERVICES
efensive Driving. Lots-of-
ot!! Ticket dismissal/insur-
it. M-T(6pm-9pm), W-
Fri.&Sat.- Fri(6pm-8pm)
10pm), Sat(8am-2:30pm).
America. Walk-ins wel
sh. Lowest price allowed by
'. Dr., Ste.217. 846-6117
n. early.
ILEANING. Housekeepinj
^75-3355. Move in/out, bi
lly. Affordable rates, $62
3CS@CS.com
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 5 • Monday, August 11,
RIGHT TO PRIVACY
Name of Bryant’s alleged sexual assault victim shouldn’\
C rime makes headlines. It is
a simple, time-tested formu
la for a popular story. A
high-profile case involving a
crime and a big-name star will
garner ratings, readership and dol
lars, while sensationalizing events.
But just because something’s sensationalized
does not mean the names involved are more
important than what took place.
Crime is a matter of public record, and it
should remain so. Citizens have a right to
know the threats that could assail them and
what is happening in their community. The
United States was formed to protect its citizens
and their interests, but there must be a line
drawn between actions for sensationalism and
public, or perhaps private, good.
The recent naming of the alleged sexual
assault victim in the Kobe Bryant case is a
prime example. What rational interest was
served in releasing the woman’s name on
nationally-syndicated talk radio, besides grab
bing a larger Neilsen rating? The only thing
that gave the radio host the right to announce
her name was the lack of legislation protecting
her and punishing him.
The release of the name of a victim of sexu
al assault without consent is a violation of pri
vacy and stands to victimize the person all over
again. The Federal Communications
Commission fines media organizations for
cursing, and people sue media outlets for
libel, but no law exists connecting an
individual’s inalienable right to priva
cy in his position as a victim of
sexual assault.
The “rape shield laws” exist
to prevent the defense from air-
WILL KNOUS
ing private, unrelated details of
the accuser's sexual past or mental
health history in court arguments,
setting a precedent for laws pro
tecting the damaged rights of the
victim. In Texas and other states,
there are laws on the books pro
tecting the victims of sexual assaults and
minors. The nationalization of these laws is
necessary. The drafting of further legislation to
protect the victim — not from undue attacks
in the courtroom, but in the public view —
seems perfunctory.
a
What rational interest was
served in releasing the woman's
name on nationally-syndicated
talk radio, besides grabbing a
larger Nielsen rating? The only
thing that gave the radio host the
right to announce her name was
the lack of legislation protecting
her and punishing him.
There does exist, in most news organiza
tions or firms, in-house policies and rules dis
allowing the announcement of rape or sexual
assault victims’ names. These professional
ethic guidelines are well-meaning, but vary
from organization to organization and are sim
ply not as effective as they should be. If, for
example, an on-air personality violates his
have been released
employer’s standards and practices policies, he
could be dismissed, but the damage has been
done. A DJ might have to find a new job, but
the victim’s most personal matters have been
irrevocably aired. These in-house policies have
an effect to some extent, but without formal
legislation there seems to be no serious punish
ment for this behavior and subsequently, no
foreseeable end to the suffering these viola
tions cause.
One could make the argument that the vic
tims’ stories should be told. Their experiences
and survival could help others prevent or deal
with similar situations. Their voices could be
some of the most powerful in combatting the
heinous crimes they suffer. That is completely
valid. Their potential influence is immeasurable.
But there must be a judgment made between the
nature of these so-called “personal” crimes and
others in regard to a victim’s privacy.
The most important idea behind a former vic
tim’s possible impact is his choice to come for
ward — an effective way to invoke the constitu
tional right to confront your assailant in a far-
reaching way. But there must be that consent
given by the victims themselves — not by radio,
television or any other source looking to get
attention with no regard for the irreparable dam
age done. Neither the media nor the government
should have the right to make these lives and
terribly private matters public or make a martyr
out of someone on the evening news.
Will Knous is a junior
journalism major.
Graphic by Seth Freeman
Times’ new public editor unnecessary
Though meant to appease public and restore credibility, position won’t work
T o refurbish The New York Times' tarnished
reputation, newly-appointed Editor in
Chief Bill Keller announced July 30 that a
“public editor” would be appointed to represent
the interests and opinions of the readers, accord
ing to The Times.
While it is apparent and commendable that Keller is
attempting to appease the public and return credibility to the
reputation that was tarnished by multiple accounts of plagia
rism earlier this year by Jayson Blair, this meager attempt at
credibility is not the solution.
The public editor will be expected to write about internal
issues at The Times, comment on the coverage of any story
and have them published in The Times' pages, serving to shed
light to any instances or suspicions of bias.
Basically, this public editor will have the freedom to criti
cize other writers in any way he sees fit, being only account
able to the editor in chief, according to The Times. He will be
an educated journalist who can publish letters to the editor in
the guise of a column, while being paid to do it.
Perhaps instead of paying someone to publicly evaluate
other writers’ works, they could hire editors and reporters who
do their job ethically. The fabrications of a
reporter are embarrassing and ridiculous, but
even worse is a chain of command of editors who
ignore the discrepancies or who are too oblivious
to require a reporter’s sources be thorough.
The job description requires the individual in
question to be a representative of the public. However, the
paper should already represent the public and cater to its
needs. If a paper only represents the public in a single col
umn, there are much larger issues to deal with. Reporters and
editors should be responsible to represent the opinions of at
least a portion of their readers, and if there was a true need
for this position, it would deserve more space than just a sin
gle column.
The internal workings of The Times are not a subject that is
consistently newsworthy, making The Times' slogan “All the
news that’s fit to print” questionable. The only instance that
would be worthy of attention or coverage would be another
round of plagiarism and dramatic resignations.
The Times should hope this does not happen again.
However, the mere existence of a public editor does not assure
that. The hiring of quality journalists and the monitoring and
accountability of those reporters would.
Problems of newsroom management are at the heart of a
reporter who gets away with repeated accounts of falsehood.
While the problem is unquestionably one that overrides one
editor’s mistakes or one reporter’s lies, the solution will cer
tainly not be found in a commentary that few will undoubtedly
bother to read.
The revival of the reputation of The Times is something
that will take time, dedication and persistence and the solution
will only be found in a dedication to excellence. The hiring of
someone to comment on problems implies that they are still
present and will continue.
While Keller has created additional positions for senior-
level editors to supervise compliance with internal procedures,
according to The New York Times Company’s Web site, which
is a definite step in the right direction, the creation of this
position is nothing but a worthless appointment and a waste of
space on the page.
Sara Foley is a junior
journalism major.
SARA FOLEY
MAIL CALL
College Station police
have wrong priorities
The fact that the College Station
Police Department is foiled by car
break-ins should not come as a sur
prise to any reader. CSPD is con
trolled by one focus: alcohol. The
department spends so much time
and effort trying to crack down on
underage drinking and other alcohol
violations that they lose track of other
crimes being committed in the city.
When my roommates and I
returned from Christmas break two
years ago, we realized our apartment
had been burglarized. We filed a
report late that night, and we
received a letter in the mail two days
later stating that the case was closed
due to lack of evidence. Despite
numerous fingerprints and various
other pieces of evidence taken from
our apartment, they could find noth
ing. We later came to find out that six
other apartments and numerous cars
in our complex had also been bur
glarized. Bang-up job, CSPD!
1 bet if we had been residents over
the age of 25 they would have put in
a little more effort. Maybe they were
busy solving the city's underage drink
ing problems.
Police and city officials seem to
think that busting parties is one way
to curb drinking violations. I can
attest, as I'm sure many others can,
that this simply leads to further
complications.
How many times have you been at
a party when the cops show up and
you drive home, or to another party,
instead of taking CARPOOL or catch
ing a ride with a designated driver?
The police department should seri
ously consider making some changes
to rectify this embarrassing situation.
James Morrow
Class of 2002
Republicans also broke
quorum when a minority
In response to David Shoemaker's
assertion that the Republicans did not
flee and break quorum when they
were the minority party in Texas, it
should be noted that they did just
that in 1993.
The particulars of the Republicans
breaking the quorum can be seen on
The New York Times Web site,
www.nytimes.com (The New York
Times, 8-5-03).
When it comes down to it, both
quorum-breaking parties are using
their rights as elected officials to carry
out the procedures of the state gov
ernment. Even though they were the
minority, they still saw need to make
changes and not give in due to their
lack of majority power.
Instead of growing up and realizing
that "they cannot rule forever, nor
can they win them all," the
Democrats are simply following a
Republican precedent.
Politics are politics, the minority
party will do what it can to have
some semblance of power over the
majority.
The people of Texas should be
proud. Democrats are acting like
democrats and Republicans are being
Republicans. In addition to that, they
might be witnessing the inception of
another "... unalterable Senate tradi
tion."
Michael Connolly
Class of 2004