Letters

Wednesday, October 21, 1998

Letters

Media to blame for voter apathy

I was pleased to read Catherine Turner’s article about the
decline in voting rates (News, Oct. 12). The dangerous, continuous
decline in voting-rates has got many worried, and for good reason.
However, the explanations Turner suggests for lack of activism
merely point at symptoms rather than expose the problem. She cites
busy schedules, apathy and confusing registration procedures as
excuses raised by students (and similar ones would be undoubtedly
raised by other populations). But these are excuses. There is a
lack of motivation to vote, which is due to a more fundamental
problem: The media is not doing its job!

Today, the media is a critical link between the citizens and the
government, between individual and society. The media’s role is to
inform and educate the public. But does the media give people
enough quality information to make the decisions a democracy
requires of them?

Today’s news organizations are concerned with maximizing
profits, which means that good stories are sensational ones. The
media has turned to entertainment rather than information.

The recent Clinton-Lewinsky case serves to demonstrate this.
Despite numerous polls revealing that Americans, above all, want to
hear less about it, the media has gone on and on, using language
and headlines that fit more in weekly tabloids than on national
news.

It may appear that people’s appetite for political information
is weak, that they seem to not care about important issues. This is
because the media, which is supposed to provide the information and
motivation for action, does not cover important issues with the
appropriate quality. A person that does not vote is insufficiently
informed about the issues and the candidates, and therefore is not
motivated to take action. Apathy does not appear out of thin air.
It is created out of neglect by the media.

Adva Kalderon

Fourth-year

Communication studies and economics

Yes, education

is a right

This letter is in response to Maclane Key’s article "No such
thing as Å’right to an education.’" (Viewpoint, Oct. 19) Hell
yeah, there is such a thing as right to an education!

Key’s article makes a lot of assumptions that twist the meaning
of education. First, if Key would read his article again, he would
notice how his words are similar to the rhetoric of the folks that
took books away from the slaves. Yes, Key, knowledge is power. You
better believe it.

For centuries the dominant class in a society has taken away the
"right of education" to keep the people down. Who’s "wrong hands"
are you trying to keep education away from? What elite few are
afraid of sharing power?

Second, Mr. Key mistakes "education" for "information," and
"education" for "teaching." No, you don’t have to tell me if you
murdered your wife, but I better have the chance to find out. No,
you don’t have to give books away, but I had better have the chance
to buy them if I want to.

What Key fails to realize is that going to UCLA is a privilege
for some, but it should be a right for all.

He forgets that there are people who went through difficulties
because others thought that they didn’t have a right to an
education.

Yes, education is a double-edged sword, but it’s one that we
must endure, or else we would have no hope at all.

Alexis Camins

Third-year

Theater

Comments, feedback, problems?

© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]