Letters to the Editor
By Daily Bruin Staff
May 12, 2004 9:00 p.m.
Shapiro right; The Bruin is biased
After reading the article on Ben Shapiro’s new book,
“Book misconstrues facts” (News, May 11), I am struck
that not once is the book summarized or its charges presented in
any systematic fashion to the reader.
Instead, I read what seemed to me the Daily Bruin’s
point-by-point critique of the book. Surely this article would have
been more appropriately relegated to the Viewpoint section,
especially as it provided only as much factual information about
the book as was needed to properly attack it.
I wonder if Shapiro will cite the article, an opinion piece
masquerading as a news report, in another of his works commenting
on blatant bias at UCLA?
Robert Johnston Third-year, microbiology, immunology and
molecular genetics
Author immature and close-minded
Ben Shapiro says he was raised by Reagan-loving Republican
parents who taught him “the difference between right and
wrong.” But Shapiro’s extremely conservative views on
the left, Muslims and blacks suggest a child who indulges in
ignorance rather than tolerance.
Charlotte Hsu’s article “Book misconstrues
facts” (News, May 11) painted the picture of a bitter little
boy who can’t shake off the grudge he has against this paper.
He says he’s “certainly not above anyone else”
but loves to mention on his Web site and for this article that he
is attending Harvard Law School in the fall.
When confronted with inaccuracies in his book, he canceled his
interview with The Bruin. The fact is Ben Shapiro is too biter and
immature to be taken seriously.
Paul Schmeltzer Third-year, linguistics
Brainwashed? Look who’s talking
So, let me get this straight. Ben Shapiro thinks that we liberal
students have been brainwashed, but he gets his conservative views
from his conservative upbringing? OK, just checking.
Jim Cozzens Second-year, physics
Oh, the irony ““ Bruin inaccurate
In response to Monday’s front page article about
Shapiro’s new book on bias in higher education, I caught a
major factual inaccuracy. As a correction in Wednesday’s
paper notes, The Bruin inaccurately reported that when I appeared
on the “The O’Reilly Factor,” I was identified as
a Bruin “reporter.” Transcripts and my personal video
show that I was identified as a “Daily Bruin
columnist.”
On a more general note, I would also like to point out from my
perspective, as someone who worked in the Viewpoint section for
three years, that Tuesday’s article was utterly typical of
The Bruin and beneath the dignity of a paper that should be focused
on serving all students.
The article very clearly was composed of two sections; the
second-half read like a typical profile, but the first half focused
on attacking Shapiro. The two could have been ““ and should
have been ““ separate articles. Had the article been split
into separate factual (the second half of the story) and analytical
(first-half) pieces, students would have had little reason to be
confused. But by cobbling together two pieces to make one (rather
confusing) story, the readers were again shortchanged.
But the biggest problem with Tuesday’s article is it reeks
of typical amateurish score settling. I have never seen a liberal
professor or liberal student activist receive such harsh,
undeserved scrutiny from The Bruin.
When Professor Gabriel Piterberg stated before last year’s
anti-war walkout that he would not allow his students to
participate ““ then in the aftermath, admitted to a reporter
that he in fact did permit his students to walk out ““ the
Daily Bruin is silent. When The Bruin runs not one but two fawning
articles about a student activist’s “civil
rights” bus ride to Washington, D.C., without soliciting any
countervailing perspective from informed opposition, we
conservatives just sigh to ourselves. Yes, it’s business as
usual. But that doesn’t make it right.
In the end, it seems The Bruin’s nitpicky criticism of
Shapiro is not about “the facts” or his book’s
mistakes.
It is time The Bruin looked at itself and its biases ““
which are indeed “institutional” and, unfortunately for
a sense of impartiality, very provable.
Andrew Jones Alumni, Class of 2003 Former Viewpoint
columnist Former chair, UCLA Bruin Republicans
Taco Bell should leave campus
Was anyone really surprised Taco Bell failed to produce a report
of a third-party investigation into the working conditions for
tomato pickers in the fields of southern Florida (“Taco Bell
fails to report,” News, May 11)? I certainly
wasn’t.
In the past few years, the Department of Justice has
successfully prosecuted three cases of involuntary servitude and
human trafficking involving the enslavement of tomato pickers in
Florida. Several more cases are currently under investigation and
prosecution. Yes, unfortunately, slavery still exists in the United
States.
According to the National Agricultural Workers Survey report
conducted by the Department of Labor, there are several instances
of abusive conditions in Florida fields. The violations include
insufficient wages, lack of overtime pay, lack of benefits, lack of
freedom of association and harassment and abuse.
The choice for the Associated Students of UCLA board of
directors is clear: It must not allow Taco Bell to completely
disregard UCLA’s demand for proof of adherence to the UC
suppliers code of conduct.
It must drop the Taco Bell contract.
Nathan Lam Third-year, anthropology
