Crimson Attack on ESAC is Unfair

The Crimson's recent attack on the Ethnic Studies Action Committee (ESAC) presented an absurdly inaccurate portrayal of the group ("Need for Ethnic Studies Unproven," Opinion, Nov. 18, 1994). Most of these misconceptions could and should have been avoided by responsible journalism on the part of The Crimson staff.

First of all, The Crimson should stop quoting members of ESAC out of context. Such carelessness is particularly egregious given The Crimson's acknowledgement that ethnic studies "is a complex issue, both philosophically and logistically." As such, as The Crimson editorial points out, the issue deserves a rational exchange of ideas.

Contrary to this goal, the editorial took out of context a comment by Hyewon T. Chong '95: "It's because I've spent so much time working through the appropriate channels, I feel that a different approach may work better." This comment has been re-quoted out of context by The Crimson twice before, despite her request for a printed correction.

The editorial board is correct in pointing out that such a comment is "an ambiguous statement that could signal several different directions." Instead of merely assuming that ESAC is plunging into militant activism at the expense of "rational debate," the editorial board should have considered what Chong meant by "a different approach." In fact, she was alluding to the quiet activism of the Academic Affairs Committee, a committee which has collected ethnic studies syllabi from other universities and submitted them to the dean of undergraduate education.

The different approaches Chong was referring to--in the context of the interview--did not have anything to do with burning down the Law School but rather with more teach-ins, public discussions or perhaps even a house seminar course. Furthermore, this misconstrued quote arose from a long dialogue Chong had with a Crimson reporter for a feature story on ethnic studies. It is hypocritical of the editorial board to support addressing the complexities of ethnic studies and then turn around and reduce several interviews to one misrepresentated statement.

This trend of recommending "rational debate" to ESAC and ignoring ESAC's actions toward that purpose can also be seen in The Crimson's news coverage of the issue of ethnic studies. The Crimson's article on the teach-in was inaccurate not only in its portrayal of the event, but also in its reporting of basic facts ("Ethnic Studies Teach-In Calls For Activism," news story, Nov. 10, 1994). The reporter depicted the teach-in as primarily a call for "sit-ins and other forms of protest." She neglected the debate that addressed many of the "serious doubts as to whether an Ethnic Studies Department would be beneficial," about which The Crimson editorial expressed such concern. For example, the editorial suggested the following concerns as if they were revelations that never occurred to ESAC: the accusation that ethnic studies is "incoherent" as a discipline, the issue of whether or not ethnic studies courses could be absorbed by existing departments and whether or not a separate ethnic studies initiative would relieve pressure to diversify current departments. Anyone who attended this teach-in and last May's teach-in could testify that these are the central questions that were constantly brought up and addressed in the discussion.

Not surprisingly, The Crimson also has trouble reporting basic facts correctly. In the news story, the now-famous Hyewon Chong quote was quoted out of context. Furthermore, one of the panelists. Assistant Professor Anne Cheng, was reterred to as "Associate Professor." In her talk, she told a story about an ethnic literature scholar whose proposal to the National Endowment for the Humanities was rejected. The Crimson article referred to this as a proposal to the "National Institutes of Health," making Cheng's criticism of this rejection seem inane and incomprehensible. In the editorial about ethnic studies, Chong is referred to as "the group's leader," when in fact, ESAC is a collective without any officers.

Finally, a word about protests. The editorial states, "we hope they [students who support ethnic studies] continue to move toward debate in place of open protests to make their case." The Crimson staff seems to assume that debate and protests are mutually exclusive. While ESAC wholeheartedly makes increased dialogue and rational debate a priority, the group also recognizes the importance of protest. Both kinds of action are essential.

Despite the fact that many members of the administration were sent personal invitations to the teach-in event, none of them showed up. If it weren't for the rallies and the petitions organized by the students for ethnic studies last year, the administration (and The Crimson, for that matter) would not have noticed that ethnic studies is an important issue that can no longer be ignored. Irene C. Cheng   Hyewon T. Chong   Julie C. Suk   Members, ESAC