University of Nebraska Kearney - Blue and Gold Yearbook (Kearney, NE)

Page 25 text:

Strong

Page 24 text:

mi Back to School Summer ends ack to school! As summer IJ came to a close we re- grouped, reorganized and faced forward to begin a new school year, For some the change from sum- mer to school was gradual, as students wore shorts to classes, then sunglasses to Cottonmilll Lake after- ward. For others the change from summer vacation to the start of classes was more drastic. Some students walked off the beach and into the classroom, then kept moving forward until they reached the library. As school began, some saw the year to come as a beginning to their last year at KSC. Graduation took on a reality they could almost touch. Others began their first year at KSC and looked forward to the coming years with vigor and enthusiasm; taking a major forward step in their lives. Familiar faces and an old familiar building were gone. However, new faculty, new students, a new look and new facilities to teach and learn in, made back-to-school exciting for those new to KSC and created an invigorating change for those already established here. While back-to-school at KSC marked a first for some, it meant a return for others, We were back in college to work, play, study, laugh, cry, become frustrated and accom- plish. It was a time to meet new friends and keep in touch with the old. But for all of us, back-to-school was a time to come together in shared suroundings for the purpose of continuing our education and meeting educational goals. — Jane Carroll Upper right: Suzle Jlllette and Fred Lowrey dance to the music of “The Group in the Nebraskan parking lot. The dance wel- comed KSC students back to school, Right: Back-to-school means going a little crazy for these girls during street dance held in the Nebraskan Courtyard during Welcome Week.

Page 26 text:

Issues Ads blasted as tasteless M Ithough we continually looked ahead, incorporating new ideas, a contraceptive m 1 advertisement shocked many KSC students into taking a second look at the print covering pages to their campus newspaper. The Antelope. The three-quarter page Today ad boasted “IN I960, THE PILL GAVE WOMEN NEW FREEDOM, IN 1984, THE SPONGE GIVES WOMEN A NEW CHOICE. The ad continued to grip the reader's attention with a visual Illustration of a woman's hand holding the easy to use sponge. Complet- ing the ad, an all-American, $100 off coupon enticed consumers to pur- chase two 3-paks or one 12-pak. This commercial attempt to en- lighten the KSC campus challenged many students to examine the value of censorship and determine how freedom of the press affects each of them personally. Offended by the blatant sexual Implications of the ad, two KSC students publicaly criticized The Antelope with letters to the editor, Kevin Scarrow accused the paper of trying to promote sex by printing and showing their support of this product. He went on, it is an offensive form of advertising which is displeasing both to faculty and students ... The advertisement is degrading to the Image of the paper. Russ Czaplewski also criticized the paper, There are limits to the tastelessness of the ads that are appropriate to our college news- paper ... I would like to think that the school newspaper would try to uphold the moral standards of our society and set a good example for the college as a whole. In response to the accusations KSC student Brenda Lovelace defend- ed The Antelope, suggesting It's the maturity level of the person that allows him to handle the idea of seeing them (contraceptive ads), Another KSC student, Mark Schroll wrote the editor, supporting this view. Perhaps the advertisement is serving the needs of those students not fortunate enough to have attended Helen Redden's (KSC instructor) Human Sexuality class. He questioned the rationale of the two young men accusing The Antelope of immoral ethics by writing, What is offensive about a product that besides being educationally oriented, claims to provide the consumer with freedom, choice and implicitly the ability to be personally responsible? At the center of the advertising conflict, freedom of the press and the issue of censorship were pitted against one another. The Antelope agreed to publish the advertisement at $60 per ad. Was The Antelope free of all responsibility as far as the offended students were concerned? The First Amendment does guar- antee Congress shall make no laws ... abridging the freedom of speech or of the press which, on the surface, suggests The Antelope was acting within moral and legal boundaries. A 1981 Supreme Court decision, the Magner decision is also a factor. In this case, a college newspaper adviser refused an ad for an abortion referral service, but also accepted an ad for Birthright. The Supreme Court said that just because one doesn't agree with viewpoints, they can't be kept out of the newspaper. Because of this decision, college newspapers must accept ads if they are publicly funded, as The Antelope is. The newspaper must also accept ads if it is established as a public forum, meaning it runs editorials and accepts letters to the editor. However, a 1970 Supreme Court ruling put restrictions on complete freedom. Newspapers are legally bound to consider community as well IN 196a THE PILLGAVE WOMEN A NEW FREEDOM. IN 1984,THE SPONGE GIVES WOMEN A NEW CHOICE. ON TWO M»AOd OR ONE 12-PACK Ji Iv-m i Inna itrw T rniv-1uir wan. j araf ihrw hwi ihem a wraiNr nor opoon tn hnti conrrrJ Ural T(»L« T.x{ vHk Connwptivr Sperne T'xiffT W a niff. uMTifi rtablr rKii utiUi SoocWntJA rhc «me (flsw tfcrnwicJc hme h«n uMtvt ovrr 10 v.»n The SpaftBC h r-r y t»uw Vouiutf numn-n h iKarmuM water anJ inwri i liluc- a CBttjVft. uvJ a frw a fuQ Jt hpuf WitS Tlv Sp'tvjjr. V'X) ihifi i K-nv in worry aivvt wic And n , h«7 nL vnft r(j » i vaginalttkiqittsijw Ha tven pwrn rrv r crJcviiw Ei l vn mnA«|h sv-m of aimmr fcatirv mil «ah'» 17 trnflaw St ' » Hjr-r hem 4it Ofoxiiw. w don't neoi a pnrvnpwnlitTh Spcr®.1 1( tan he isjnd a: sm -U local Jiuc «n.w and ji wlo.«si mpenfLwlwt), fr» riw Hucirof cmwn rt ! lltwV And ihr.Tcdjft u !h«- rnniranrf tve rival nnn wirJi wmeooe tutalk ti rut 2+-hc ir TxiW TiliT Jne Jl wwj haw any quouau. ur tram ;um uWmni: i The Sfwvtjt n right Ire uni, vmr nwr Modern health «-topt at in i call Ji U W IN tin CAfcrmiu Ott-llM) N I firwfh wu haw the ifWWrtt ynu want and the iMidni iwj wc«i hr i if all wju luw afinthtTthrtCr » u fVrvef Unlit SUM. kOOlta ■ -m rmm.‘w « il ■« -w -4 '«Ip Vp'|p ■■•«■A — V I Op W J Cmw as national standards when determin- ing guidelines for censoring obscenity within pubiicotlons. In this cose, what are community and national standards? Does the ad present a viewpoint in good taste, or is it obscenity that should be cen- sored? Has the campus pendulum swung toward the right, and are students offended by the contraceptive ad, or Is the ad a product of free enterprise which the public can either accept or reject. As we are looking to the future and forming our opinions and stan- dards, we must decide. — Donna Swigart