Spring Break
Our View: Penley, cronies misled CSU students, faculty
Issue date: 3/7/08 Section: Opinion
Upon the revelation that Gannett dismissed the notion of a "strategic partnership," as coined by CSU President Larry Penley after a secret meeting in January, the Collegian staff has a few questions for the administration.
Wasn't this so-called "advisory committee" formed to review proposals submitted by Gannett? If Gannett ended the conversation after the first meeting -- as far as we know -- why is this group still meeting and what is its purpose? Members of the committee seem to be asking the same questions.
What's more, Gannett is frank in saying they wanted to buy the Collegian, as a for-profit entity, nothing more. Penley sang a different tune earlier this semester, promising CSU and the community that he never discussed a sale of the paper, but rather how Gannett could provide opportunities for Student Media.
This means either a) Penley lied to his university, or b) he is too dumb to understand the difference between a takeover and a handout. Considering Penley's strategic strong-arm tactics and blatant disaffection for the student body, we're betting on A.
Something stinks in our administration, and Penley's cronies, who know very little about Student Media and how it works, say no matter what the advisory committee -- seemingly formed under false pretenses -- recommends the to the CSU Board of Governors, Student Media will change.
Now there is no proposal from Gannett. CSU turned a sale down flat, effectively ousting proposals from other companies. What, then, is the purpose of the elusive advisory committee? It's damage control and diversion until summer, when the hollow recommendation will be delivered to the Board of Governors and a decision made regarding Student Media. Conveniently, campus is largely vacant in June.
Penley and his administration clearly wish to stifle free speech by changing the bylaws under which the Collegian operates after we printed the F-word next to the president's name. Maybe he can form an advisory committee to review the First Amendment. We doubt it.
Wasn't this so-called "advisory committee" formed to review proposals submitted by Gannett? If Gannett ended the conversation after the first meeting -- as far as we know -- why is this group still meeting and what is its purpose? Members of the committee seem to be asking the same questions.
What's more, Gannett is frank in saying they wanted to buy the Collegian, as a for-profit entity, nothing more. Penley sang a different tune earlier this semester, promising CSU and the community that he never discussed a sale of the paper, but rather how Gannett could provide opportunities for Student Media.
This means either a) Penley lied to his university, or b) he is too dumb to understand the difference between a takeover and a handout. Considering Penley's strategic strong-arm tactics and blatant disaffection for the student body, we're betting on A.
Something stinks in our administration, and Penley's cronies, who know very little about Student Media and how it works, say no matter what the advisory committee -- seemingly formed under false pretenses -- recommends the to the CSU Board of Governors, Student Media will change.
Now there is no proposal from Gannett. CSU turned a sale down flat, effectively ousting proposals from other companies. What, then, is the purpose of the elusive advisory committee? It's damage control and diversion until summer, when the hollow recommendation will be delivered to the Board of Governors and a decision made regarding Student Media. Conveniently, campus is largely vacant in June.
Penley and his administration clearly wish to stifle free speech by changing the bylaws under which the Collegian operates after we printed the F-word next to the president's name. Maybe he can form an advisory committee to review the First Amendment. We doubt it.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
Craig Hawley
posted 3/09/08 @ 3:10 AM MST
http://lbunion.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/10-01-07-page-02-intro.pdf
To bad the Collegian still does not get it.
This was not about free speech but about abuse of free speech. (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 3/10/08 @ 7:25 PM MST
Does this editorial board never shrink from attempting to focus attention upon themselves, instead of actual news?
First they thought they were in a heated political argument with the Bush administration. (Continued…)
dante
posted 3/11/08 @ 6:12 AM MST
The Collegian is only interested in the free speech which allows them to repeatedly present their side of the issue without giving equal time to an opposing view. (Continued…)
Post a Comment