TV3 production story unfair
I am not writing to whine to students that the Fast Forward show is actually good because I understand that with any form of entertainment comes criticism. However, I was extremely disappointed with the manner in which the Daily Wildcat decided to write and publish the article.
I understand that the three students presented in the article may not have liked the show, but I did not see a reason to print something so absurdly broad as "New Variety Show Bombs With Student Viewers" on the front page of the paper.
According to TV3's research, many students actually enjoyed the show and found it very entertaining. Furthermore, I have never seen the Wildcat severely bash a piece of student-made art before. Like any other group on campus, the members of TV3 volunteered a lot of their personal time to produce something that students may enjoy. The fact that the Wildcat decided to write a story about how the art produced by TV3 represents a sad piece of journalism. What's next, a front page headline that reads, "Uganda Dance Group is just too boring and is not worth the student's time to go see?"
In conclusion, I feel that the ethics of journalism were absent when this article was written. The purpose of a journalist is to present the facts to the public. However, the front page headline about TV3's show seemed like a second-rate, Enquirer-type headline, making a cheap attempt to get people to pick up a paper simply because it is more fun to read about people's failures than their accomplishments.
Aaron Bilgrad
TV3 program coordinator
Winsky column off base
I am writing in response to Laura Winsky's editorial in the Feb. 19 Wildcat. I think her comments about President Bush bombing Iraq just for popularity is ridiculous and hypocritical of Ms. Winsky. First, if Ms. Winsky had watched the Pentagon briefing, she would have realized that Iraq is becoming a threat again, since a certain ex-President from Arkansas couldn't get the job done. Someone has to take care of Saddam Hussein!
Secondly, no one used bombing Iraq for popularity more than Mr. Clinton. I think it was more than a coincidence that Mr. Clinton decided to bomb Iraq in 1998 right when his impeachment trial was starting. I don't hear Ms. Winsky saying anything about this. In the future, Winsky should try to write articles that are a little more credible because if she accuses a Republican of wrongdoing, chances are Clinton has done it more than once!
Charles A. Peterson
history freshman
Iraq bombing not black and white issue
This letter is in response to the article by Laura Winsky, "America's Reputation." The argument of the article has certain problems, such as the reference to the bombing of Iraq as "servicing the target." Well, no news agency called it that, no government agency called it that, and the President didn't call it that. So where does that phrase even come from? In the US, we simply call it bombing, the same as CNN, New York Times, BBC, or the Guardian.
As for the civilians who were killed in the bombing, yes, that is tragic. But not because we don't care about the Iraqi people who are hurt in these attacks, but because Saddam Hussein places his citizens near military targets. Did you ever stop to think why there were civilians at these radar sites? Because when we bomb them, Hussein can play it up to the world press. To him, they are not people, they are propaganda.
Also, a point on the world opinion issue that Ms. Winsky's article points out. Turkey, Jordan, Russia, China and France all denounced the attack. Of course, France and Russia both want the illegal Iraqi oil, against the UN charter. Jordan has always backed Saddam Hussein, even when he invaded Kuwait. Turkey could always ask the US forces to leave their country, if they felt we were wrong to bomb Iraq.
Here is the underlying facts of world opinion. The US is enforcing the UN Charter that ended the Persian Gulf war. Those sites were targeting US personnel enforcing the UN-sanctioned Southern and Northern No Fly Zones. Maybe the idea of those radar sites shooting down a US or UK aircraft protecting the Iraqi people appeals to you. Who do they need protection from? The same Saddam Hussein who you think is the victim of US aggression.
I only bring this up because you may want to look at more then the surface issue and the world opinions, on so that you may further understand that not every issue is so black and white.
Ryan C. Shaffer
UA alum
