By Arne David Ekstrom
Arizona Daily Wildcat
March 4, 1998

Nike protestors not

To the Editor,

I am writing in response to a letter written by Adam Talenfeld on Feb.16 ("Likins' Nike trip a sign of good leadership"). I first became concerned about Nike's human rights record when I read about the long hours and miserable working conditions that employees are subjected to in third world countries such as Vietnam as reported in the New York Times (Nov.4, 1997). I wrote Philip Knight to express my strong disapproval of these abuses only to receive a form letter stating that this information was circulated by "fringe newspapers." I believe few would consider the New York Times a "fringe" newspaper. Furthermore, the letter argued that Nike complies with local labor laws despite a report (also in the NYT, Nov. 4, 1997) suggesting they violated even third world overtime laws.

Because these inconsistencies in Nike's response indicate their willingness to misrepresent information to serve their own needs, I therefore beg strongly to differ with Talenfeld's commendation of Likins for "researching his arguments" solely by speaking with representatives of Nike! As any student will agree, a research paper that takes its information from one source, and a biased and unreliable source at that, would not be much of a paper. President Likins has yet to meet with Students Against Sweatshops (SAS) or address any of our objections to a contract between UA Athletics and Nike in a serious manner. I am convinced that once President Likins carefully examines Nike's lackluster human rights record, he will share the sickness that rises in me when I consider a deal that will benefit an irresponsible company and tacitly condone the exploitation and abuse of workers in economically developing nations.

Arne David Ekstrom
Students Against Sweatshops
Neuroscience Graduate Student