'IDS' should publish rebuttal to ad

After reading the Horowitz "ad," I would like to share the following with you and the IU community: \n1) The Indiana Daily Student owes its readership an explanation for the decision to run this opinion editorial masquerading as an "ad." An "ad" by definition is not objective. Thus, to accept an "ad" on such a highly charged topic is tantamount to knowingly practicing false advertisement. (Or is it your view that the "ad" is factual?)\n2) Professors Robert Chrisman and Ernest Allen Jr. have written a scholarly rebuttal to Horowitz, "Ten Reasons: A Response to David Horowitz." It is available at www.umass.edu/afroam/hor.html. They welcome having it published in the IDS. Given your poor judgment, which resulted in the publication of the Horowitz "ad," journalistic integrity dictates that you publish this complete rebuttal, free of charge.\nThe real issue here is not about free speech. Virtually all will concede that you indeed had a right to accept the "ad." Virtually all would further concede that Mr. Horowitz is entitled to believe whatever sophistry and distortions he deems necessary. Moreover, he has the right to advocate these views wherever and however he wishes. \nNor is the issue about where one might stand on the reparations question. In other words, even individuals who are against reparations, but value intellectual honesty and integrity, are more than likely repulsed by your decision to print the propaganda. \nThe real issue is whether the IDS has the institutional integrity to admit poor judgment and lead the collegiate press by being among the first, if not the first, to print a rebuttal with the same prominence of the original "ad"