Don't edit ideas
Joseph M. Powers
associate professor, aerospace and mechancial engineering
I disagree with your decision not to print the recent submission of Mr. David Horowitz. Indeed, as you argue in your letter Thursday, The Observer has a right to control its content. You have done what editors must do: edit. This, after all, is nothing but a legitimate form of censorship used by all newspapers every day.
But not every editing decision is wise. Yes, Mr. Horowitz' s advertisement is provocative, and yes he is more manipulative than most. That, in itself, is not a reason to reject a contribution. Anyone writing an opinion in a newspaper is attempting to provoke and manipulate to some extent.
Were The Observer to have found conclusively that there were significant errors of fact in Mr. Horowitz' s contribution, its decision would be more defensible. We learned that The Observer "had doubts as to the reliability of the information presented as facts," but nothing specific is cited in its letter, nor has there been a widespread documentation of factual errors in the mainstream press.
Mr. Horowitz does address an issue which has received considerable attention in the public square and the halls of Congress. Why should this not be discussed at Notre Dame as well? The topic itself is controversial, and, to some, inflammatory. But the best way to deal with such issues is to discuss them. I believe The Observer would do well to publish Mr. Horowitz's arguments. They would also do well to simultaneously take an editorial stand on the points he raises so that the Notre Dame community can hear the voice of its leaders of student opinion.
Joseph M. Powers
associate professor, aerospace and mechancial engineering
University of Notre Dame
March 29, 2001
All Viewpoint Stories for Wednesday, April 4, 2001
