Letters

"WRCN is indeed not inferior to its sister station WCBN-FM. The difference between the two is in format only."

To the Editor: We at CBN were very pleased to be recognized in your last issue. However, there were some inaccuracies that need clarification.

Our current by-laws concerning air personnel state that one must be a University student or a former member (old members who have returned to the fold) and that a non-station member must have direct supervision. In conjunction with this, it should be noted that a primary purpose of this station is to provide experience in all phases of radio work to qualified and interested students. If ever we have "guest disc jockeys", (as it is hoped we may do this summer for a 3-hour slot some designated evening a week) or if we have a non-station member do a radio show, we keep in mind that primary purpose, and that once again, a non-station member must have direct supervision when using our facilities.

In regard to the reference to WCBN-FM's sister station, WRCN, the paragraph was in error on several counts. It stated that "The very rawest initiates are confined to WRCN, CBN's carrier-current Top 40 format sister station."

First, WRCN is primarily a 60's Gold station, and while it plays many current hits, it is not strictly Top 40. However. this distinction is minor compared to the implication that the station is inferior to its sister station. It is indeed not. The difference between the two is in format only. In no way are the disc jockeys on WRCN any less trained than on WCBN-FM. This is because a Rock & Roll 60's Gold format is just as difficult to do well as an FM progressive show. And WRCN provides an education in this format that in not available on WCBN-FM.

Furthermore, disc jockeys do not do shows on WRCN because they haven't "graduated" to WCBN-FM. This is totally false. Jocks do shows on WRCN because they enjoy the format, the music, and the practical training it affords them. While it is true that a 3rd Class Radiotelephone license is not required to do a show on WRCN, this requirement is a function of the nature of the radio transmissions and not of the quality of the station. And while WRCN is a carrier-current station, the audio signal is also cable-cast over Ann Arbor Cable Television Channel 8. This puts WRCN in the category of a community station, as this gives it the potential of reaching approximately 40.000 Ann Arbor cable television listeners on any given day.

Finally, through its commercials, WRCN helps finance the Campus Broadcasting Network, including WCBN-FM in a way that its sister station cannot possibly do.

Thus, in these several ways the article slighted a future viable force in the Ann Arbor community as well as a valuable educational experience for the students of the University of Michigan.

Nonetheless, the article gave WCBN-FM a very favorable treatment, and wish to express our gratitude for the exposure.

Ross Ojeda,

CBN General Manager

"[A cigarette ad] seems to be in total conflict with the life culture philosophy that I thought was a firm policy of this alternative paper."

Dear Editor,

Having read and enjoyed the Ann Arbor SUN for many years, I was totally freaked out by the Newport cigarette advertisement in the April 11 issue. I immediately called the SUN offices to investigate this blight on the back page of the issue.

I was even more freaked to hear from SUN worker David Sinclair that the SUN does indeed support this death culture product. "We need the money," was the reply.

Now to me this seems to be in total conflict with the life culture philosophy that I thought was a firm policy of this alternative paper. I don't think I have to enlighten the SUN as to the ill effects of this death culture drug on the mind and the body.

It's bad enough to be bombarded with advertisements from death dealing products in honky magazines, on honky billboards, on the honky radio and television, but in the SUN?

I protest and hope the SUN will reconsider this strange, new and disappointing policy.

William Swaney

Ann Arbor SUN,

I was just enjoying laying back in bed reading the SUN and it really freaked me out to see such a fine paper as yours advertising cigarettes.

It concerns me deeply that my family, friends or anyone harm themselves by smoking. I also look at it with an ecology viewpoint.

I want to make this brief, so I'll leave it up to you to think about my point seriously.

Clare Rubach

(Editor's note: We honestly dislike running cigarette advertisements but as you can see, we 're doing it again this issue. Some of the products in our ads are not very attractive to us. These economic decisions are painful but the alternative to taking such ads would be the collapse of the SUN.

Acceptance of ads however, is different than endorsement of products or companies, and do not effect our editorial content. We hope readers will understand our economic necessities, and tolerate those ads we do decide to accept in order to keep the SUN going.)

"The three major U.S. auto companies are negotiating with the military junta in Chile... in an attempt to monopolize the auto industry in our country."

To the people of the United States,

Information we have received discloses that the three major U.S. auto companies, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler are negotiating with the military junta in Chile. They have submitted bids to the Pinochet government in an attempt to monopolize the auto industry in our country.

The self interest of these multi-national corporations is in direct violation of the needs of working people both in Chile and in the U.S. The actions of the auto companies also runs counter to the moral norms expressed by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and the Organization of American States, which charges the junta with "extremely serious violations of human rights."

At a time when the hardships of unemployment are seriously affecting U.S. auto workers, these three companies are seeking to profit from the forced labor under military discipline of Chileans who will receive bare subsistence wages. Their cynical, typical bankruptcy is underlined by the fact that the same three corporations ceased production in Chile during the term of the constitutional and democratically elected government of Salvador Allende.

By closing down their operations in our country in 1971, these companies conspired to cause a crisis in spare parts, seriously crippling Chilean transportation. Their complicity in the economic blockade against the Unity government was a serious factor in creating a climate which facilitated the military coup of September 11, 1973. Now with the temporary military dictatorship, the murder of some thirty thousand of our citizens, the establishment of concentration camps and torture houses throughout our land. and with effective trade unions outlawed, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler perceive an opportunity for investment and the production of excess profit.

Recently, in Mexico City, with the unanimous acclamation of more than a hundred victims of Pinochet's torture and concentration camps. Luis Figueroa, General Secretary of the CUT, the Chilean Labor Federation, demanded the "total boycott of goods and investments to the junta."

We call upon the people of the United States, most importantly, trade unionists and workers in the auto industry to bring all possible pressure to bear on Ford, General Motors and Chrysler to withdraw their bids to invest in Chilean fascism.

Even from an economic point of view, the auto companies are wrong and doing a dis-service to their investors When in the not very distant future, the Chilean people crush the nightmare of fascism from our country, whatever accord, pact or economic agreement with any state, international organization or corporation, agreed to by the military junta, will be dissolved and rejected absolutely.

We have confidence that the solidarity of the North American working people will deal with this situation effectively. The multi-national corporate enemy is contained by no national laws or boundaries. The bonds between the working people of nations, large and small, must be strong enough to tie the hands of these giant corporations.

Laura Allende

Deputy to the National Congress, U.P. Gov't.,

Pedro Vuskovic

Minister of Economics, U.P. Gov't.,

Comité Nacional de Solidaridad y Apoyo a Chile.

"Any radical party will necessarily engage in a good bit more thought and clarification of its position than will one of the two major parties, who will take any stand to gain votes."

Dear SUN,

In your April 25 issue a letter from Michael Minnich attacked the Human Rights Party and its supporters on several grounds. He concluded by calling for the abolition of the HRP and the Republicans and the building of another "third party." I would like to comment on his letter.

1 . It is undenied that the reason Frank Shoichet lost his primary race to Richard Ankli was that several leading Democrats voted for Ankli in order to insure that Carol Jones would have a weak opponent. Shoichet then suggested that Council pass an ordinance allowing candidates nominated in primaries to withdraw and be replaced, as Ankli had run as a joke and wanted to withdraw. If one party deliberately sabotages the primary election of another party, it seems to me that remedial action is proper. Shoichet was beaten fairly in the general election and I have not heard him complain.

2. The HRP established preferential voting so that the will of the citizenry would be more accurately expressed. If some members of that party chose not to urge other members to express more than one choice, I can't complain. Maybe they thought that, while most Democrats would be acceptable second choices (therefore supporting preferential voting in general), Wheeler wasn't acceptable. I wasn't at the meeting and I doubt that Minnich was either.

3. While 68 people chose Stephenson as a second choice over Wheeler, 90% of the HRP voters chose Wheeler instead of Stephenson. I suggest that this shows the vast majority of HRP voters felt preferential voting was worth their time and did in fact vote for a candidate more closely representing HRP's interests than Stephenson. Besides, Minnich makes the unstated assumption that everyone's politics ought to run in a neat, smooth continuum from left to middle to right. This isn't so for some people and they certainly have the right to vote their preferences.

4. I think it was wise for Councilperson Kozachenko to announce that she was not a member of a coalition. If you commit yourself ahead of time to always voting one way, you lose much of your effectiveness. The HRP received about 10% of the vote in the city election and now holds about 9% of the vote on Council-its fair share. lts views on many issues are different from those of the Democrats-that's one reason the party was founded. To have Kozachenko announce now that she will always vote with the Democrats would be downright absurd. But I suspect that if Minnich watches how she actually votes as issues come before the new Council, he will not be disappointed in her.

Minnich then states that HRP has turned people off to politics, without any evidence to support his charge. For his information, there has been a dramatic fall-off in political participation across the country in the past couple of years. He concludes by calling for a third party which will "work for concrete change and not make us suffer through their own selfish and egotistical 'intellectual games'."

I don't know what third party Minnich has in mind. Having condemned both the HRP and the Republicans, he sounds like a Democrat to me. And as to "intellectual games," any radical party will necessarily engage in a good bit more thought and clarification of its position than will one of the two major parties, who will take any stand necessary to gain votes without any thought of the long-term social consequences.

Perhaps Minnich is not up to "intellectual games." The general tone of his letter is that in Ann Arbor there are "progressives" and "non-progressives." With this rather oversimplified view of the world, Minnich would probably feel right at home in the Democratic Party.

David Cahill