David Horowitz controversy at UC Berkeley
UC Newspaper Apologizes for Insensitive Ad Message argued against slavery
reparations
Charles Burress, Chronicle Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle, March 2, 2001
Berkeley -- Besieged by protests, the independent, student-run paper at the
University of California at Berkeley ran a front-page apology yesterday for
publishing an ad on the last day of Black History month against reparations
for slavery. A similar apology was published yesterday by the campus
paper at UC Davis. The apology in Berkeley followed a heated
confrontation between editors and protesters in the Daily Californian
newsroom Wednesday afternoon, said the paper's editor in chief, Daniel
Hernandez. Protesters afterward removed all the remaining papers from
campus news racks. The "ad allowed the Daily Cal to become an inadvertent
vehicle for bigotry, " the paper's apology said. It said the ad
accidentally slipped through the screening process for ads. The $1,200
full-page ad, which appeared on Page 7 of the paper Wednesday, was written
by neoconservative David Horowitz and was titled, "Ten Reasons Why
Reparations for Slavery is a Bad Idea -- and Racist Too." The!
ad was in response to a growing call for reparations for damage done to
African Americans by slavery. The ad said no single group was responsible
for slavery, that Black Africans and Arabs enslaved ancestors of African
Americans, that most Americans today have no links to slavery and that
reparations would isolate African Americans. "I was . . . extremely
offended that this racist ad was published on the last day of Black History
month," said Jacquelyn Lindsey, a first-year African American student who
joined in the protest and who is helping prepare a full- page
response. She said the ad was inaccurate and offensive, particularly
parts saying that blacks owe a "debt" to America and that African Americans
have "already been paid . . . trillions of dollars in the form of welfare
benefits and racial preferences." The Daily Cal pledged to give the
protesters a full page for their rebuttal Monday. The protesters want the
rebuttal to run for 10 days, and they want a larger apology from the paper,
but Hernandez said that has not been agreed on. Yesterday's apology was
four paragraphs in the upper left corner of the front page. The paper also
published a column by Hernandez apologizing for the ad, saying the paper
does not publish "incorrect or blatantly inflammatory ads" and that this ad
accidentally slipped past the normal policy of editorial board review of
controversial ads. Horowitz, who used to be a leader of the New Left as
editor of Ramparts magazine before turning conservative, said he is still a
civil rights advocate and doesn't want to see African Americans become the
target of resentment over reparations. He called the Daily Cal apology "a
really black day for the First Amendment. . . . It's important to have a
dialogue of many voices. The reality at UC is that there is only one voice
on these issues because people are afraid of being called racist." He spoke
from Los Angeles, where he is president of the Center for the Study of!
Popular Culture, which paid for the ad. It has been published at three
campuses -- Berkeley, Davis and the University of Chicago. The California
Aggie in Davis ran it Wednesday and published an apology from the editor
yesterday following protests. It ran Feb. 9 at Chicago, and no one
protested to the paper, the Chicago Maroon, said editor in chief Daniel
Kingerie. Timing of the ad was largely coincidental, said Horowitz's
executive assistant Stephen Brooks. It was sent to two campuses in early
February -- University of Chicago and California State University at
Northridge -- because they were hosting conferences on the reparations
issue, Brooks said. Later it was sent to 10 more campuses, and this week it
is going out to 10 more campus papers. At least six papers rejected it,
he said, and he has not heard back from the others. At the Harvard Crimson,
the advertising department accepted it and it was scheduled to run Tuesday,
but the editorial department vetoed it, Crimson!
representatives said. Daily Cal editor Hernandez said the ad
"essentially said that the black community should not complain about
slavery." Horowitz said the ad focused on reparations, and that he
recognized slavery as "a tremendous injustice." The confrontation at the
Daily Cal newsroom grew so heated Wednesday that UC police responded, but
Hernandez said he asked them to leave. "There was definitely a lot of
yelling, tossing of papers, ripping of papers," he said.
---- E-mail Charles Burress at cburress@s... 2001 San Francisco Chronicle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Mar 05 2001 - 18:46:14 EST