LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Response to IAA Controversy

To the Editor: In reference to the disclaimers at the end of the articles co-written by Jeremy Kahn and Peter Morrison -- are these not continuations of the series of published opinion pieces which began with an utterly specious set of accusations leveled against the IAA on the editorial page in the official DP opinion column at the beginning of this whole debacle? The articles written by the senior editor and editorial page editor, respectively, are slanted, and should not be mistaken for news. It seems fairly obvious to me that the DP is biased against the IAA, and SAC, and in pursuing this smear campaign, it is proving itself editorially irresponsible and plainly vicious. Is it not utterly ridiculous to expect that Peter Morrison will have no say in what is published on "his" page concerning the IAA -- he has ultimate responsibility for everything that hits that page. Additionally, the DP's headlines have consistently blared sensationalistic, and compared to the body of its articles, schizophrenic, accusations with fluff serving to "substantiate" its rumor-mongering. It frustrates me to witness the evolution of the DP into a news-like organization. The DP has the potential for being a paper which explores issues that range much further than this -- why not report on campus activities and events that are more relevant to the broad Penn community than beat the dead horse of rumor and accusation? Lija Bentley College '96 n To the Editor: On Tuesday, November 28, the DP accused me, along with the International Affairs Association, an organization of which I am on the board, of fraud. This article was only the latest in a long line of misrepresentation and sensationalism by the DP during this ongoing issue. What is worse, the DP has also shown very poor journalistic skill or integrity through the course of this process. As much as I would like to respond to the specific charges of fraud, I do not feel it is necessary. Anyone who wants to do so can read the SAC finance report, the only one that used the IAA's books, and the results of that audit. However, I would like to address the notion of fraud in the use of the telephone that Morrison addresses. This issue is new, but it is just as asinine as all of the others. The problem here, in large respect, is that Morrison neither had the IAA's books, nor talked to anyone from the organization who made the phone calls in question. As an example, I will take my case: If Morrison had bothered calling me, he would have received the explanation that I never called my parents at home, but rather that someone from the club, conducting club business for me while I was at home, called me to ask me a question and tell me his results. But Morrison would have you believe that I should be strung from the gallows for this phone call, as should the other members of the IAA. With more careful reporting, he could have presented a balanced story that looked at the issue objectively. This brings me to my other point -- the horrible journalistic standards of the DP. Throughout the course of this incident, I have complained that the DP continues to talk about me without first talking to me. Morrison's article is another case in point. He accuses me of fraud, but never called me to ask me if I made the call. How does he know that I placed the call to my home if he does not ask, or if anyone else in the club did the same? For someone at an Ivy League School, Morrison showed a distinct lack of intelligence and common sense in this case. Additionally, at the end of the article, the DP recused Morrison from participating in any further editorials on this issue. First, how can someone who has already had his editorial board write an editorial condemning the IAA and calling for it to lose SAC funding, as Morrison has, write an objective article or conduct an objective investigation into this issue? The answer, he cannot. So, Peter Morrison just threw journalistic integrity to the wind and wrote the article anyway. Second, I find it remarkable that the editorial board from which Morrison would supposedly recuse himself saw fit to laud his results and criticize the IAA the next day. Before the DP starts to toot its own horn, it should take a moment and look at the articles that Morrison wrote, and discover the problems that they have. This type of coverage is why the DP is, in so many cases, a running joke on campus, and if it does not clean up its act, why it should simply remain a laughingstock. Joshua Wolson College '96