A 'representation of views'?
"Since no one elected the New York Times to determine national security policy, the only action I know to register protest for their irresponsible action (treason?) is to withdraw support of their operations by canceling our subscription as many others are doing," Mendell D. Morgan Jr. wrote Wednesday in an e-mail to library staffers. "If enough do, perhaps they will get the point."That took guts. The university initially seemed to respect his decisions (except for the anti-censorship police on his own library staff who believe that treason is simply another viewpoint to assimilate through diversification. Remember, every student in American has the God-given right to read a print version of the NY Times every day!
"We understand that pornography and things not of an academic nature don't have a place in the library, but this is the New York Times," Romo said. "Whether it leans either way, it is still a staple and representation of views in our country."However, it seems the paper is back on campus.
Morgan said that supportive emails he has received from citizens, campus workers and other library staffers have reinforced his view that the cancellation itself was appropriate. He said he was changing his mind only because he regretted not conferring with colleagues first.Back to the NY Times though--I've seen first-hand how journalists tie themselves in knots trying to rationalize what they reveal--but trust me, the reason is always the same: They are big league gossip addicts--just can't pass up the chance to share something that, because of their privileged position, they know and you don't.
This issue has nothing to do with partisan politics. It's only about treason, which has no political persuasion since it is antithetical to our political process as a whole.