Advertising and Content Rightly Kept Separate

To the editors:

While I rarely agree with the editorial content of The Crimson, I feel I must respond the letter (Letters, Feb. 23) which implicitly blamed the paper for printing a controversial advertisement.

A reporter once explained to me the importance of ensuring the independence of a paper's editorial and business departments. Keeping these two boards out of each other's affairs guarantees the freedom of writers to report on any and all matters, including the publication's sponsors; if this freedom were suppressed by business interests, a journalist's pursuit of truth would be farcical. Likewise, the advertising board should be able to gain revenue from any sponsors, within broad guidelines of taste, regardless of the editorial board's stated opinion. The Crimson surprisingly showed maturity in publishing an advertisement contrary to its views.

The letter from the Students for Choice, by contrast, displayed a disturbing lack of maturity and analysis. While the writers profess to "welcome overt discussion and opinions regarding the abortion debate," their letter apparently complains that the Crimson has allowed the opposing viewpoint to be presented.

Second, the group deems the advertisement's claims "silly" and "false." Granted, an unsupported claim that the world's population can be housed in Texas seems "silly." But as anyone who read the piece would have understood, this was simply rhetorical hyperbole used to refute over-population arguments in favor of abortion.

Students for Choice say that they "do not blame The Crimson," but permeating the entire letter are calls for the "review of information" in the advertisement, and for the "notice [of] the journalistic approach." The group treads lightly in an attempt not to utter the ugly name of censorship, which lurks beneath the surface of the letter. Indeed, the closing line, which deems the decision to publish the advertisement "a disgraceful action on the part of The Crimson," contradicts the group's claim to be holding back blame.

If we are seeking truth in this debate where future lives are at stake, both of mother and child, then let all necessary information be exposed. At heart we're all pro-choice, the real controversy lies with what we decide; how we decide it should be the same: without ignorance. JORGE ALEX ALVAREZ '01   Feb. 23, 1999