Drama over docudrama
ABC’s docudrama “”The Path to 9/11″” elicited the consternation of some former Clinton administration officials over the way they were portrayed in the program. ABC still aired the program Sunday, but edited some of its content in response to the complaints. Was ABC right to air the docudrama? Were the former Clinton administration officials out of bounds in complaining?
| I’d rather not get my information regarding the details of 9/11 from Harvey Keitel, a New Kid on the Block and “”Everybody Loves Raymond’s”” wife. I feel like a broken record with this stuff, but this nonsense keeps getting produced. The former Clinton administration officials have every right to question a work that is avowedly fictitious. The blurry line between fiction and reality in a “”docudrama”” is dangerous, particularly regarding this subject matter and the possibility of passing fallacy as fact. If the shoe were on Bush’s foot, this would not be an issue of free speech, but rather slander. Or “”unpatriotic behavior.””
– Shurid Sen is a political science senior |
| The last time I read the First Amendment, I recall a small section being dedicated to a free press. Apparently, former Clinton administration brass, Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid, didn’t get the memo: Government officials cannot “”Soprano””-style strong-arm networks into pulling critical television programs off the air. The liberal blacklisting of ABC’s “”Path to 9/11″” is shameful and dangerous and suggests something of a desire to hide history. The point of the film was to wake Americans up to the real and imminent threat of Islamofascist terrorism by learning from our mistakes. Evidently, the Democrats were so concerned with how they looked onscreen that they didn’t get that message either.
– Jon Riches is a third-year law student |
Checking test banks
Some greek houses on campus maintain test banks, where members have access to old tests others in the organization have saved from courses they’ve taken. Are test banks an unethical advantage or a useful study tool?
| Greeks shouldn’t be criticized simply because they thought of something other students could just as easily do themselves. In a world of Web sites and e-mail, regular students could amass a database of old tests with relative ease. And ethically speaking, saving old tests is no more inappropriate than saving old notes; if anything, it’s a check on lazy professors who are content to reuse the same tests year after year. So let’s face it: Test banks are a good idea, and the greeks were enterprising enough to execute. Let’s not fault them for that. |
-Damion LeeNatali is a senior majoring in political science and history
| Test cabinets at fraternities and sororities are another example of the greek system as a bastion of elitism and a continued unequal playing field. If students at the university are going to succeed, it should be through their own work and resourcefulness – not through what are at best unethical means and at worst cheating. Just because students in greek life pay to have friends does not mean they should also receive fraudulent academic advantages. Test cabinets are just another example of the irresponsibility of a corrupt greek system. A responsible university and greek system would end this form of crooked privilege. |
– Sam Feldman is a political science junior
