(4 of 5)
Sir: Let's face it: mass-media newscasting [April 26] is now the global version of that old game, let's you and him fight. For profit, politics or publicity, we are perpetually assaulted, kicked in the adrenal glands, frustrated and depressed vicariously by the stream of reports on rape, riot and rebellion in places we know nothing about, will never see, can do nothing for, and which consume our energies and misdirect our concerns from our real individual responsibilities for job, family and community. One man's information is indeed another man's identification with militarism, license, revolt, sadism or criminality. Worse, the newscaster's carefully modulated vocal intonation of emotional neutrality carries a powerful subliminal, nonverbal "message" to impressionable minds about society's indifference to aggression and human suffering. This is an insidious attack on society's age-old weapon of restraint: collective moral indignation. The so-called "truth" is very difficult to communicate accurately. It must only be broadcast after careful evaluation in the light of total communications impact, and with full awareness of the "other and distorted messages" conveyed by carelessness or sensationalism regarding timing, balance, intonation, emphasis, association, attitude and implications. In short, newscasting can no longer afford to be show business.
ROBERT C. CURREY Larchmont, N.Y.
Tell It to the D.A.
Sir: Heartiest congratulations to President Peterson on keeping her cool in the Linda Le Clair affair [April 26]. The problem is not Barnard's, or that of any college. It was produced—and must be accepted by—the adult community. What I rebellious students overlook is the immutable equation that if one would contest the paternalistic supervision of the college, he must accept the legalistic restrictions and moral consequences of society. Even if Linda makes the minor point that some of the residential requirements of the college may trespass upon what she claims as her individual rights, has she proved the proposition implicit in her impertinence: that she may cohabit anywhere with a male not her spouse? Surely Barnard is not alone in expressing its disapproval. Has not society condemned it also? Or has it? If Barnard will not consent to Linda's plans, perhaps she can stop by the district attorney's office and get his endorsement.
KEITH F. SCOTT Circuit Judge State of Illinois Macomb
Sir: Rabbi Goldman argues that Barnard's housing rules should be changed since they "cause a great deal of guilt because everybody breaks them." I reckon he could say the same about the Ten Commandments, but I don't think Moses would like it. Nor, very likely, would God. This is a rabbi?
RICHARD WHITE Short Beach, Conn.
Sir: I don't know what kind of student Linda Le Clair is or what kind of a mistress she makes, but judging from the picture of her apartment, she makes one lousy housekeeper. Doesn't Barnard College have a Home Economics department?
(MRS.) HARRIETTE B. WAGNER Northbrook, Ill.
Vive la Difference