The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 82, No. 26, Ed. 1 Friday, April 21, 1995 Page: 2 of 20
twenty pages : ill. ; page 19 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
2 FRIDAY. APRIL 21, 1995 THE RICE THRESHER
OPINION
No Fear
Houston journalism just won't be
the same without competition
"Utterly sickening. It was disgusting, painful news."
— Former Post Editor David Burgin
A disturbing trend has swept across the state of Texas and the country
at large. Newspapers are folding.
The Houston Post closed its doors on April 18, 1995, after a 115-year
history. In the past four years, three major cities in the state of Texas have
lost major newspapers. Besides Houston, San Antonio lost the San Anto-
nio Light in 1993, and Dallas lost the Dallas Times Herald in 1991.
Some would say, "Well, that's the business world," but that is not the
point.
Ask any journalist what is his or her worst fear. Getting sued for libel
might come up a couple of times, but the resounding answer would be, "I
have always feared getting totally scooped by the competition."
Exit the second major newspaper in three major cities — no competi-
tion, no fear.
While some studies over the past couple years show that there is little
to no impact on the second paper when the major competitor folds, the real
effects are evident. Take the Dallas Morning News for instance. It is one of
the top 10 papers in the country, but the staff has become decidely
desensitized to the community it serves.
Rice students from San Antonio have said that the better newspaper
folded in their hometown.
What is happening to the free press that this country was built on?
USA Today President A1 Neuharth said the newspaper in its current
form will never die, but 22 major newspapers have failed since 1983.
Journalism is about stress and fear. Being able to pound out a 1,500-
word story about corruption in the city council with one hour till deadline.
Making sure to get the story before
Oru«irmW your comPetition.
In terms of the Houston Post the
rt loss of that institution was handled al-
~ ^ most as poorly as the firing of legend-
fS* ary Dallas Cowboys Football Coach
5T Tom Landry.
The staff found out about the clos-
ing through e-mail and newscasts. Correspondents in foreign countries
were stranded in those countries. There was no final good-bye. Houston
journalism may not have ever been the best in the world, but at least it had
heart.
Not anymore.
I The t ■ aI since me
Kice rhresher
Vivek Rao, Charles Klein
Editors in Chief
George Hatoun
Business Manager
Drew Bagley
Advertising Manager
George Hatoun
Chetan Kapoor
Felisa Yang
James Ling
Shan Chang
Marty Beard
Heather Smith
David Gordon
Tony Tran
Grant Flowers
Kate Hallgren
Christof Spieler
John Koshy
Robert Kdslow
Packy Saunders
Joel Hardi
Rakesh Agrawal
Hemmy So
Chris Sanders
Nina Olien
Lily Fu
Meredith Hamm
News Editor
News Editor
Asst. News Editor
Opinion Editor
Asst. .Opinion Editor *
Arts & Entertainment Editor
Asst. Arts & Entertainment Editor
Sports Editor
Sports Editor
Asst. Sports Editor
Features Editor
Features Editor
Backpage Editor
Backpage Editor
Backpage Editor
Photography Editor
Asst. Photography Editor
Copy Editor
Graphics Editor
Ads Production Manager
Asst. Business Manager
Staff Cartoonist
The Rice Thresher, the official firebrand student newspaper at Rice
University since 1916, is better than Rice News and is published each
Friday during the school year, except during Pub fires and holidays,
by the charitable students of Rice University.
The Thresher reserves the right to refuse and burn any advertising
for any reason. Additionally, the Thresher does not take responsibility
for the factual content of any ad or the fire at the Pub.
Editorial and business offices are located on the second floor of the
charred Ley Student Center, P.O. Box 1892, Houston, Texas 77251.
Phone 527-4801. Fax 285-5238. e-mail: thresher@owlnet.rice.edu.
Advertising information available on request. Mail subscription rate
per semester: $20.00 domestic, $40.00 international via first class mail.
Non-subscription rate: first copy free with a box of matches, second
copy $2.01 with a blow torch. We advocate that the new Pub play rap.
Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the Thresher
Editorial Staff. All other pieces represent solely the opinion of the
author. What the freak? Why does Wiess smell? © COPYRIGHT 1994
ITS NJLSEV, SW.
NOMOKtBNWOttABffN.
pouofscrw-
TW6-HUMW&
NlilffW
Animals' rights differ from ours
To the editor:
I am writing in response to the
letter by Kanika Bahl and Mona
Rashad propounding animal rights
{Thresher, April 7).
They state that "we can no more
deny animals rights because they
are not humans than we can deny
blacks rights because they are not
white or can deny women rights be-
cause they are not male." This is an
obscene inversion of the very con-
cept of rights.
THE EDITOR
Letters
Humans have rights precisely
because we are not "animals" in the
sense of the word meant by Bahl and
Rashad.
Rights are necessary in human
society because humans do not have
an automatic standard of behavior
like instinct.
Human beings are rational ani-
mals in the sense that we possess
reason and must use it to survive.
Moreover, with irrelevant excep-
tions, all people live in societies in
which we must live with other people,
and we are not born with instincts to
make this an automatic, unthinking
process as is the case with termites.
We may institute a society in
which the stronger force the weaker
to support them, or we may choose
to establish a society in which force
is abolished as a proper means of
dealing with others.
If we choose the latter, then we
must establish a society in which no
person may be forced to give up the
product of his or her labor to others.
This situation is the basis of rights.
From the purpose of rights, we
see that rights pertain only to hu-
man beings.
This reason is why we extend
rights to children; they are human
beings, and although they do not yet
fully recognize others' rights, they
can be taught.
It is why in a proper society all
people, black or white, male or fe-
male, have rights, and why slavery is
evil.
This assumption is why the spe-
cial circumstances (not special needs
or special interests, which are sec-
ondary) of women_give them the
right to abortion:
No person may be forced to be
the property of others, whether for
nine months or a lifetime, no matter
what the interests of the putative
owner might be.
And it is why we guard the rights
of college professors and mentally
disabled individuals alike while we
restrict the freedom of criminals to
roam society — not because they
have equal capacities to suffer or to
* Animals cannot be
expected to respect the
rights of others. ...
Thus, we have leash
laws for dogs, laws for
the proper restraint of
livestock, and all else. '
be happy, but because most college
professors and mentally disabled
individuals* can be expected to act
without violating the rights of oth-
ers, and criminals cannot.
SEE ANIMALS, PAGE 3
Letter errs in concept of animal rights
To the editor:
I read with interest Bahl and
Rashad's letter about atiimal rights
in your April 7 issue. The authors
rightly state that society cannot be
based on majority prejudice.
They make a laudable attempt to
justify the concept of "rights" but
miss the mark because of mistaken
premises.
Bahl and Rashad contend that
"the only distinction to be made is
that animals are not human," insofar
as humans, not animals, have rights.
These authors never make any
important distinction between ani-
mals and man and, in the end, draw
upon a dubious similarity between
the two ("the ability to feel suffering
and joy") to assert that both have
rights.
The essential difference between
man and other animals is that man
is, in Aristotle's terms, the rational
animal. N^an's basic tool of survival
is his mind, not brute force, spin-
ning webs or chewing his cud.
Barring accidents of nature, the
only way to prevent a man from us-
ing his mind to survive is for other
men to prevent him from it by force.
It is this fact that leads to th^concept
of rights, the fundamental right be-
ing the freedom to use one's mind
without interference from others.
° Rights thus stem from the nature
of man and are not "given" as Bahl
and Rashad state.
Also, rights are not based on su-
perficial "equalities" among men
such as color, sex or income.
Men can profit from using their
minds in a society by specialization
and trade only when that society
" recognizes and protects their rights.
The alternative is varying degrees of
tyranny.
' [Bahl and Rashad]
draw upon a dubious
similarity between [man
and animal] to assert
that both have rights. 9
nally and the fact that a fetus (only
potentially human) has no rights.
The incompetent are protected" to
the extent that they have some de-
gree of rationality.
Finally, since rights pertain
strictly to man, animals have rights*
only in the sense that they exist as
property of men.
We, like other animals, do eat
• ' SEE RIGHTS, PAGE 4
To~^RTTE...
Incidentally, this is why a society
based on majority prejudice (of
which Bahl and Rashad disapprove
without expiration) is wrong.
A society that does not protect
individual rights is one that allows
force to interfere with the free exer-
cise of one's mind, i.e. survival.
Jim Crow laws and hiring quotas
are examples of violations of indi-
vidual rights with disastrous conse-
quences.
Bahl and Rashad also mention
abortion and the rights of children
and the retarded.
These are not isolated issues, i)ut
applications of the fundamental right
to use one's own mind.
Abortion reflects the right of a
woman to plan her own life ratio-
Short letters (200 words or
less) may be sent in by
E-MAIL:
lingjjj@owlnet.rice.edu
CAMPUS MAIL:
Thresher
* * . .. ..
0 Longer letters should
be submitted on a Macintosh
disk in the Microsoft Word
format. Include a paper copy.
Deadline for all letters is
5 p.m. on Monday
All letters must include
your name, college,
year of graduation and
phone number (names
may be withheld by
request in special
circumstances).
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Klein, Charles & Rao, Vivek. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 82, No. 26, Ed. 1 Friday, April 21, 1995, newspaper, April 21, 1995; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth246511/m1/2/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.