136 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(02/23/10 4:21am)
Brady Short, a pair of square-rimmed sunglasses covering his eyes, is watching over a three-man pit crew scrubbing his fire-engine-red No. 36 racecar for the first of several times one Friday evening in September. It’s still warm under the dwindling afternoon sunlight at the Bloomington Speedway. The pits are filling fast. Brady’s wife, Ashley, is chatting with Brady’s family. Brady’s father, Don, isn’t throwing dirt clods yet. He is just strolling around the pits, shaking hands with all who have come to see his son.
(09/21/09 3:34am)
Billionaire energy entrepreneur T. Boone Pickens told campus and
community members in a speech Friday that continuing to import upward
of 65 percent of the country’s oil is among one of the United States’
greatest national security threats.
(09/18/09 4:57pm)
Billionaire energy entrepreneuer T. Boone Pickens told campus and
community members in a speech Friday morning that continuing to import
upward of 65 percent of the country’s oil is among the United States’
greatest national security threats.
(09/17/09 3:15am)
Billionaire oilman T. Boone Pickens will present high-profile plans to
reshape American energy consumption during a speech on campus Friday.
(09/03/09 4:22am)
IU President Michael McRobbie will be among Gov. Mitch Daniels’
delegation to Asia next week, in what fellow University and commerce
leaders say could further pave the way for engagement with Chinese and
Japanese research institutions and businesses.
(04/09/09 4:20am)
Indiana Senate leaders released a budget proposal Wednesday, calling
for sustained IU funding even as the state is faced with diminishing
tax revenue.
(04/02/09 4:33am)
With Senate budget recommendations expected within a week, it remains
unclear how the state will ultimately fund IU in light of vanishing tax
revenue throughout the ongoing economic downturn.
(02/17/09 4:00pm)
Ten years since his first big break, local artist Joel Washington is on the brink of national acclaim.
(02/17/09 4:00pm)
Perhaps it’s still too early in the day to call a paintbrush and blank canvas Joel Washington’s transcending tools to eminence. It’s just past 10 a.m., and the Indiana Memorial Union custodian has three more hours pegged to a different trade’s tool. He wheels a squeaky gray trash bin through the corridors, atop sterile linoleum tiles in a routine repeated for more than 20 years.
(08/07/08 1:34am)
By announcing the addition of IU senior Drew Allenspach to the athletics director search committee on Tuesday, IU President Michael McRobbie drew praise from student leaders, who called the announcement a sign of the president’s commitment to student opinion.
(06/30/08 7:59pm)
With IU’s name likely to be further muddied as NCAA investigations continue, top University administrators have realized potential complications caused by frustrated and disappointed alumni.\nFew envy the challenges IU President Michael McRobbie will face in the coming months, characterizing the ongoing situation as a crossroads in his young tenure. How he handles the pressure, some say, could be a telling factor for discerning alumni. \n“He’s got to become more visible” regarding the incident, said University Chancellor Ken Gros Louis.\nFor many alumni – especially those out of state – athletics success is an indicator of IU’s achievement as a whole, he said. \nOverseeing athletics is just one of the many responsibilities a University president faces. And by several accounts, it’s an area both McRobbie and his predecessor Adam Herbert allowed to self-manage. \nHowever, last Thursday’s NCAA announcement charging IU with a failure to keep a close enough eye on the department highlighted the relationship between the two University sectors, but also forced McRobbie to involve himself more actively and directly in the process, University administrators and trustees said.\nMcRobbie’s vision for growing the institution is vast. While spending significant time abroad, hoping to grow the University’s name, at home he has embarked on an ambitious building plan. The plan will require substantial alumni support. But with a shroud of negativity covering the IU Athletic Department, the prospect of convincing some alumni to donate generously could become more daunting.\n“The embarrassment people feel really dampens their enthusiasm,” Gros Louis said. \nMcRobbie’s approach now might be attributed to receiving word some major donors were considering pulling or slashing potential gifts, he said. \nMcRobbie’s concerns and actions were not based on appeasing donors, but had the greater interest of the University in mind, however, said IU Spokesman Larry MacIntyre.\n“President McRobbie very much wants to get all of the NCAA issues resolved quickly, but also in a way that is fair to our current coaches,” he said. \nThe men’s basketball recruiting scandal already cost several coaches their jobs and prompted the decision by Director of Athletics Rick Greenspan to resign at year’s end. \n“As athletics director, knowing what he did about (Kelvin) Sampson’s background, I think it was his responsibility to keep him on a very short leash his first year,” Gros Louis said.\nSampson had a history of recruiting violations at the University of Oklahoma, and IU officials warned the new coach when he took over in 2006 against committing further infractions for the Hoosiers.\nGreenspan is the latest of a host of athletics officials dismissed by IU for their involvement in recruiting scandals.\nLack of confidence in the program’s stability also prompted several of the University’s most coveted recruits to break commitments, forcing new head coach Tom Crean and staff to scramble to pin down their side. \nFor McRobbie, the scandal has cast a shadow over his administration since the beginning. The NCAA charges broke last October and overshadowed a week of activities planned to celebrate the new president.\nWhen asked, several administrators and alumni said the recruiting scandal is for McRobbie what a failed chancellor search was for former president Adam Herbert in 2004. The controversy surrounding that search eventually led to Herbert’s departure, paving the way for McRobbie and his ambitious plans for IU.\nThe president and trustees’ handling of the situation has drawn criticism from those who say the officials have acted too blasé in their approach to the issue. Trustee candidate Samuel Locke said while he understands officials’ desire not to micromanage the situation, more direct guidance was needed from the top.\n“I think it could be a case study in mismanagement,” Locke said, adding that a more vigorous approach should have been taken from the beginning. \nWith alumni scattered around the world, their knowledge of IU is often limited to following athletic teams, said Barry Gellers, IU New York City alumni chapter president. And Gellers acknowledged how quickly opinion can build or slide. \n“As long as the team is winning, (alumni) are willing to sweep anything under the rug,” he said. “But look how quickly things changed.”\nAdding that it’s been a “tough couple of months,” Gellers said the Hoosiers’ performance on the court would, in part, sway sentiment about the University’s direction. \nIt will be up to McRobbie, Locke and others argue, to provide a guiding hand through the storm. \n“It’s a matter of focusing his attention on areas he might not otherwise have focused on as much,” Gros Louis said. “And maybe he should have.”
(04/17/08 4:00am)
Editor's note:This is part three in a three-part series about the IU Foundation’s investments in companies linked to the genocide in Darfur.\nProfessor Steve Weitzman and departing IU Foundation President Curt Simic could not have taken more different roads to get where they are today. For the past seven months, they have headed opposite sides of a debate about investing in companies linked to funding the genocide in Darfur.\nSteve Weitzman never considered himself an activist. He graduated from University of California, Berkeley, but was never seriously involved with politics. The same can be said for his time as a grad student at Harvard.\nYet Weitzman, an IU Religious Studies professor, saw a connection between the Holocaust and genocide in Darfur and has become a central figure in the debate surrounding IU investment policy. He is pushing the University to adopt a policy of what he calls socially responsible investing, which would require IU’s investment managers to monitor funds and ensure that no money is tied to Darfur.\nCurt Simic, a native Hoosier and 1964 IU graduate, has served IU for 20 years, raising money from donations to fund research, scholarships and academic programs at IU.\nJust 74 days remain until his retirement. Already, his tenure is being celebrated. Late Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon labeled him as a “distinguished Hoosier,” while others at the University praised him the savior of University fundraising.\nWeitzman contends that IU has a duty to take financial action against the companies invested in the Sudanese government. Simic, on the other hand, says his main loyalty is to IU donors who entrust him with their gifts.\nA legacy to pass\nAs Weitzman read The New York Times about a year ago, a story caught his eye. That story linked Fidelity, one of the companies that provides IU’s retirements plans, to the genocide in Darfur.\nWith his own retirement plan invested through Fidelity, he felt partly responsible for the genocide.\nWeitzman said he has no choice but to take action now. He said one of the lessons of the Holocaust is that those who turn a blind eye are equally to blame as those who commit the violence.\n“By not doing anything, it’s also making a decision,” Weitzman said. “If you don’t respond to this situation, you’re also setting a precedent.”\nThis precedent, he said, could allow humans to carry out genocide in the future. Weitzman moved his retirement funds from Fidelity to TIAA-CREF, the other financial services company available to IU faculty and administrators for retirement investing. TIAA-CREF maintains the Social Choice Account, which targets investments that meet certain social criteria. The returns on that fund are not as high as the ones he received from Fidelity, he said, and with a wife and four young boys at home, money is not something he wants to take lightly.\n“I’ll lose some money over the course of the years,” he said. “But at the end of the day, what am I going to pass on to my kids? I don’t want to pass on to them a world that turns the other way when a genocide is committed.”\nWhile much of the recent divestment discussion has centered around investments by the IU Foundation – the University’s chartered nonprofit corporation – Weitzman and others around the country have also questioned IU’s agreements with Fidelity.\nThe University applauded Fidelity recently for apparently ending much of its indirect ties to Darfur, but some activists still charge that Fidelity remains invested through overseas markets.\nFidelity and TIAA-CREF are the only financial services companies currently available to IU faculty. Faculty members can choose between the companies and invest retirement money in one or both.\nThey also have the freedom to decide the types of funds. Because each of the companies offers many types of investment options, faculty and administrators have the freedom to personalize their portfolios. For example, TIAA-CREF’s Social Choice Account is just one of many options faculty and administrators can choose from. \nWeitzman said the University, as well as faculty, are part of an academic institution that is obligated to maintain a moral conscience.\n“This is not a corporation, and we are not just employees,” he said.\nMutual respect\nWeitzman’s office is small. Worn wooden chairs crowd around a small table cluttered with books, papers and manila folders. Bookshelves are full, and volumes of religious texts cover the room, leaning haphazardly on shelves or sitting in small piles on the floor. An air-conditioning unit obscures part of the only window.\nThree miles away, Showalter House, the headquarters of the IU Foundation, is distinctively corporate. Gray stone walls reach to the freshly polished, wood-paneled ceiling. Sunlight floods through large windows, welcoming visitors and potential donors. Showalter House has doubled in size during the past 30 years to accommodate the skyrocketing level of endowment. \nThrough a winding hallway, behind security-sealed doors, Simic’s office is a symbol of his power at IU. Two winged chairs and a burgundy leather couch welcome visitors into the large office. A grandfather clock rests against one wall and a large, ornate wooden desk fills the center of the room. It’s here that Simic controls huge sums of University dollars. It’s here that Simic transformed the IU Foundation into a mammoth institutional force during the past three decades.\nPart of the time, Simic collects donations from some of IU’s wealthiest alumni. At other times, he consoles students in crisis.\nThe girl’s father was dead – suicide, she told Simic, sitting on the couch inside his office just a few weeks ago. She could no longer afford tuition, and wondered aloud whether Simic could help.\n“I told her we were going to figure something out,” Simic said. He said he spends part of every day helping others.\nSolving these problems at the institution he has loved for decades is Simic’s idea of social responsibility.\nWith about 10 weeks until his retirement, the debate about divestment could be one of Simic’s last.\nNone of this is personal. Both Weitzman and Simic express respect for one another.\nWeitzman’s a “good man,” Simic said, a passionate man. Despite this, Simic said Weitzman’s logic is fundamentally flawed.\nThe $6 million in Foundation investments that have been linked to the genocide is less than 1 percent of the Foundation’s total endowment, and Simic said divestment would have minimal impact on the Foundation. However, he does not want to set a precedent that might allow activists to sway the Foundation in the future. He also said divesting $6 million would never make a real difference in the genocide. He said IU’s proposed divestment would be a “symbolic” gesture, something he wants to avoid. \n“I don’t want to act merely symbolically, either,” Weitzman said.\nWeitzman said when it comes to genocide, all gestures matter. He likens divesting IU’s $6 million to voting: A single vote might seem insignificant. But “voting is not symbolic,” and neither is divestment, he said.\nSimic, sitting in his office with Vice President for Investments Gary Stratten, reiterated that he thinks he has time to take some sort of practical action on Sudan. Many wait for those efforts; he has 74 days left to make up his mind.\nSolving problems is simply a part of their jobs, Stratten and Simic will agree. A few more discussions likely await Simic in what’s been years of triumph and challenge. Stratten smiled at the long-time leader. Ten weeks until he steps aside.\n“But who’s counting?”
(04/16/08 4:00am)
Editor's note: This article is part 1 of a 3-part series on divestment. Parts 2 and 3 will appear in the IDS Wednesday and Thursday.
(04/16/08 4:00am)
Editor's note: This is part two in a three-part series about the IU Foundation's investments in companies linked to the genocide in Darfur.\nWith the ongoing debate about IU’s investments in companies linked to the genocide in Sudan unlikely to end any time soon, those involved realize it’s the results-driven structure of the IU Foundation that largely fuels the controversy in the \nfirst place. \nLittle social responsibility oversight on investment managers by the IU Foundation allows the investors to invest in these government-blacklisted corporations. High-priced investors face pressure to perform or risk losing their jobs, Foundation and University officials have said.\nWhile the Foundation places limitations on how much money managers can invest in any one company, they have no social responsibility construct for investors to follow. Oversight on the social responsibility track record of various corporations is virtually nonexistent. But Foundation leaders said it’s the corporation’s duty not to allow social causes to distract from their central mission to financially support the University.
(02/22/08 5:55am)
Soaking up sun rays on an unusually temperate day in July of 1960, the half-constructed football stadium on 17th Street was only a skeleton of what it is today.\nThough the massive limestone venue was a dream realized for aging IU President Herman B Wells, a nightmare sat waiting for Wells and his University. \nModeled after Rome’s ancient Colosseum, the stadium was a monument to the efforts of Director of Athletics Frank Allen. For five years, Allen had worked to develop a “system” that would allow for better recruiting. \nThe football team at the time was mediocre at best, and recently hired IU coach Phil Dickens sensed the pressure to win. Faithful alumni were confident in Dickens. They said he was the man who could return IU football to glory. \nInstead, the 1960 Hoosiers stood on the brink of humiliation. Allegations of severe recruiting violations summoned an NCAA investigation, followed by sanctions. IU’s violations included the offering of free plane tickets to several athletes along with financial stipends, according to an NCAA report, while other recruits were delivered envelopes filled with cash. \nIU denied the charges, arguing that possible recruiting violations were just the work of overzealous alumni. The NCAA, however, didn’t buy the claims.\n“I have grave doubts any such practices on the scale, suggested by the cases at hand, could possibly have been carried on without the knowledge of and indeed, the approval of the football coaching staff,” wrote Big Ten Commissioner K.L. Wilson in his report. \nIt was a stain on the \nUniversity’s notoriously clean record. Today, almost 50 years later and again faced with recruiting violations, IU officials can only hope a phoenix flies from the ashes twice. \nThe NCAA socked IU with four years of probation following the major recruiting violations. During the probation period, all Hoosier varsity sports were barred from postseason play.\nAllen retired not long after the sanctions were announced – a quiet end to a career spanning several decades, including a stint on the IU board of trustees.\nBill Orwig took his place as director of athletics, after coming to Bloomington from the University of Nebraska. Upon his hiring, Orwig vowed to have the NCAA penalties reduced. These promises proved largely unfruitful, but echoed the wider sentiments of Hoosier fans who felt they had been mistreated. \nSwimmers, baseball players, runners and the beloved Hoosier basketball boys all paid the price for the alleged sins of Dickens and his staff. But, the University stayed faithful to its coach, and Dickens remained on the Hoosier sidelines for another five years. \n“This, of course, has been a very trying period for all of us and our families,” Dickens wrote in his resignation letter to then-IU President Elvis J. Stahr. At the time, some argued Dickens was only guilty of getting caught.\n“Everybody knew what he had to do – get the players,” said former IU defensive end Raymond Grasch. Grasch played for the Hoosiers from 1957-61 and described Dickens as an “honorable man.” Dickens inherited a program with nothing, Grasch said, and did what he had to do to make the team win. \nThe punishment was harsh – too harsh, the Hoosier faithful complained. Indiana Gov. Harold Handley called the probation “a raw deal,” but through their actions, the NCAA demonstrated the governing body’s power to dish out penalties. \nNow, almost 50 years later, with major NCAA sanctions once again looming over the University, a coaching staff’s future is in jeopardy. The Hoosiers find themselves in the same spot from which it spent years rebuilding. \n“Our athletic programs have unquestionably suffered under the severe punishment which is now being lifted,” Stahr said after the probation’s end in April 1964. “All of us are determined that the good name of the University shall not again be sullied, and all of us look forward to a bright new era of intercollegiate competition.”
(02/14/08 5:00am)
On first listen, Carrie Newcomer's album sounds like any other alt-country album I've heard. It's that second listen where you force yourself to appreciate it that its beauty stands out.\nNewcomer blurs a line between country and folk music with a noble grace. Her all-Americana voice makes her sound like a female version of Lyle Lovett, and the guitar playing evokes a happy-go-lucky Mark Kozelek of the Red House Painters -- a strange combination if you're familiar with their work. \nTo say some of her songs are just standouts is almost insulting. "Biscuits and Butter" seems like a victim of Nashville production yet somehow sounds better than anything Nashville has put out lately. Listening to it makes me want to drop out of school and move to Montana to build a cabin, and I don't even know how. "One Woman and a Shovel" is a great cruising song for any winding road trip.\nThe album doesn't have any real low points either. The only oddity is the bonus Luddite track "Don't Push Send" that sounds as if Newcomer is trying to replicate Michael Buble with a swing style, but it just feels a little out of place on this album.\n"Geodes" is by far the best track on the album. The piano is beautiful, and the guitar creates the impression of a harp. The song talks about the splendor of geodes and how they are placed in gardens where she lives, something that I, as a homegrown Indiana Hoosier like Newcomer, can understand. Every house in my neighborhood had a geode, including mine. Listening to this song brings me back to childhood and exploring my own sidewalk for discoveries.\nThe Geography of Light is definitely worth the money, especially if you account for the fact that she donates proceeds to charities she supports. So do yourself a favor, and support a local Hoosier deserving of the title of "Mellencamp's heir"
(02/07/08 5:00am)
Studying abroad in London offers many opportunities to experience the great culture of a country whose history dates back thousands of years. While the culture and history are fascinating, being here has also allowed the opportunity of going on Amy Winehouse-style pub crawls, making constant Harry Potter references and the chance to see the Spice Girls reunite in its native country in smashing, spit-spot, jolly 'ol London.\nOriginally formed in England in 1993 when they all responded to an add for five "lively girls" for a music group, the Spice Girls gained widespread attention in 1996 with its first single "Wannabe" and its 1997 debut album Spice. The following year, it released its sophomore album Spiceworld, with its film of the same name. In May 1998, Geri Halliwel, a.k.a., Ginger Spice, departed the group. By Christmas, the group scored another hit with the appropriately titled single "Goodbye." Following its last and unsuccessful studio album, 2000's Forever, the group announced its separation. After numerous weddings, solo efforts, scandals and children of their own, The Spice Girls announced its worldwide reunion tour that began December 2007. The closest the girls will get to Bloomington on this tour will be Feb. 15, when they stop in Chicago. \nArriving at London's largest indoor venue, the 20,000-seat O2 Arena, advertisements of the concert flashed as people swarmed to get into the doors. No fans were decked out in costumes, and all the 12-year-old fans of the late-'90s are now in their 20s. Chants of "Spice Girls! Spice Girls!" filled the arena as the lights went out and images of the girls appeared on the stage screens. The lights went up, and blasts of "la la la la la la" started as the girls rose up on stage tearing into "Spice Up Your Life." \nAfter thanking the crowd and stating how great it was to be back, they proceeded into "Say You'll Be There," the new single "Headlines (Friendship Never Ends)" and "The Lady is a Vamp," which was accompanied by Chicago-inspired black hats and burlesque dance moves. The girls also took a note from the TRL era of Britney Spears and 'NSYNC that followed their fame, aligning themselves with a group of backup dancers, as well as a live band. However, there was no lip-synching that night by the Spice Girls. \nInstead of its characteristic individualized costumes (no cat ears for Scary, sports bra for Sporty or little Gucci dress for Posh), the girls favored matching clothing schemes of sparkling whites, creams and boxing robes designed by Roberto Cavalli (after all these years, still no skirts for Sporty.) However, Geri's British flag dress (as well as giant Brit flags everywhere) showed up during "Who Do You Think You Are." \nEach singer performed something individually from her solo career. Surrounded by black-and-white peppermint swirls, Emma Bunton, a.k.a., Baby Spice, brought back London's swingin'-'60s vibe with her song "Maybe." Scary covered Lenny Kravitz's "Are You Gonna Go My Way," bringing a fan up on stage, only to handcuff him to a ladder and kick him with a whip. \nInstead of ignoring Geri's initial departure, the other girls had the balls, or whatever the girl-power equivalent to testosterone is, to play Post-Ginger songs such as "Holler" without her. At the end of the song, giant storm clouds and lightning bolts filled the screens. Ginger walked out in a raincoat accompanied by shirtless guys, giant vats of steam blowing up from the stage, and plenty of umbrellas as she sang her biggest hit, a cover of The Weather Girls' "It's Raining Men."\nIn the early years, the song "Mama" always featured the girls with pictures of their mums in the background. These days they're able to add pictures of them with their own kids (seven in all ... Mel C., a.k.a., "Sporty Spice," is the only one yet to pop one out.) About 25 girls aligned in matching white dresses appeared out of nowhere, turning the stage into an episode of "Deal or No Deal." (Instead of supermodels, they turned out to be a children's choir and managed to make a sappy, sentimental song rock.) \nBefore closing with "Goodbye," the group sang a medley of songs that included Sister Sledge's "We Are Family" and Kool and the Gang's "Celebration." \nWaiting only a minute to come back for the encore, the girls stalled by joking about which hit song they had forgotten to play. And so it began -- the song that started it all -- "Wannabe," with Mel B. shouting, "Yo I tell you what I want ... " and ending with a reprise of "Spice Up Your Life," while flags from numerous countries appeared on screen. \nAs the thousands of people poured out into the packed tube station, people still screamed cheers of joy and girl power, and many complained, "Why can't they stay together"
(01/25/08 5:54am)
Following a dispute Tuesday evening between members of the Student Alliance for National Security and the Indiana Daily Student regarding a request for a public speech by former government official Meghan O’Sullivan to be off-the-record, First Amendment experts and lawyers nationwide called O’Sullivan’s request questionable. But the event’s organizers said this was an issue of professionalism, not media rights.\nIn addition, the IDS found similar procedures to be commonplace at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, where O’Sullivan serves as a senior fellow. \nO’Sullivan, President Bush’s former deputy national security advisor, had been contracted by the student organization to speak Tuesday at the Indiana Memorial Union. O’Sullivan had planned to lead a discussion with students and members of the public about recent gains made in the Iraq war. However, both O’Sullivan and event organizers said the event had to be off-the-record for members of the press.\nAfter objections by both IDS reporters and editors, and the assertion that O’Sullivan had become ill, organizers canceled the event. But fallout Wednesday largely yielded more questions than answers – namely those regarding the press’ access to reporting public events. \n“This is a public university, public dollars. You cannot be bound by the agreement that those organizations made,” said Roy Peter Clark, a senior scholar at the Poynter Institute, a facility devoted to journalism and its ethics. “(Journalists) can attend that event. And you can write about that event ethically and responsibly.”\nAlthough the IDS originally challenged the request on the basis of Indiana’s Open Door Law, editors at the newspaper realized later that evening this particular situation was not covered by the law because it was not a meeting; it was a public event. IDS Editor-in-Chief Carrie Ritchie said the press had the right to quote O’Sullivan’s lecture. \n“I see it as common sense because we are going there and covering the event that had been advertised as free and open to the public,” Ritchie said. “Anyone in the city, the state, this country or the world could have attended.” \nIt is not uncommon for institutions to experience controversy about speakers, Clark said, but that controversy hardly ever stems from a request by organizers to keep a speaker’s comments private.\nFirst Amendment experts and lawyers also couldn’t think of a previous case similar to Tuesday night’s.\nIn large part, they agreed that the dispute stemmed from a general misunderstanding of the term “off-the-record.” The decision to go off-the-record is an agreement journalists can choose to make with sources, Clark said. It is not something reporters are required to do in public gatherings, and the request often includes gray areas, experts said. Additionally, they all agreed O’Sullivan had no legal authority to require all comments be off-the-record, particularly when University dollars funded the speech. \n“That is just plain stupid,” said Lucy Dalglish, attorney and executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “If you want to have a private event, say it is by invitation only.”\nEvent organizers said this type of request is typical and said they were disappointed in what they called the press’ lack of professionalism. It was an arrangement that Miles Taylor, director for the Student Alliance for National Security, said he had expected the IDS to uphold. He was also upset that IDS staff members waited until five minutes before the event began to say they wouldn’t accept O’Sullivan’s request. \n“Frankly, it was shocking to me,” Taylor said. He said major universities looking to lure high-profile speakers to campus often granted recent government employees off-the-record status. In the end, the situation for Taylor was “money lost, time wasted and IU embarrassed.”\nAt Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs – the sponsor of O’Sullivan’s fellowship – many lectures and workshops also ask for off-the-record status. A spokesman for the school said there was no umbrella policy requiring these events be held off-the-record. Rather, that decision was left up to individual presenters. \n“I think people really appreciate and value the ability to engage in true public discourse,” said Sasha Talcott, director of communications for the center. Without the press taking notes during an event, people might be able to more fully express their viewpoints, she said.\nMalcom A. Glenn, president of Harvard’s student newspaper, The Harvard Crimson, said he was not aware these types of presentations went on at the university, but said reporters at his newspaper would not concede to requests for off-the-record presentations.\nAt IU, several officials were surprised by organizers’ requests.\nLarry MacIntyre, IU’s assistant vice president for University Communications, said he’d never heard of something like this happening at a college campus. \nIn addition, University Chancellor Ken Gros Louis said denying press access to a public event “goes against the grain of what a university is.” He also said that, in his 43-year tenure at IU, he cannot remember a situation like this occurring.\nBut for Taylor, the dispute was not a question of press freedoms. Rather, it was a desire that reporters respect the request from a high-profile speaker.\n“This isn’t an issue of the rights of the press,” he said. “This is an issue of the courtesy of the press’ professionalism.”
(12/06/07 6:42am)
Despite below freezing temperatures, members of Indiana Students Against War challenged the ongoing U.S. detention of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Along with members handing out literature to passers-by, IU graduate student Alex Smith dressed in an orange jumpsuit and a black hood. Smith knelt on the stone path near Woodburn Hall and challenged the alleged ongoing torture of suspected foreign fighters.
(12/03/07 2:21am)
Beyond the differences of opinion surrounding a controversial anti-torture resolution passed by the American Psychological Association last summer, Friday’s meeting between Association President Sharon Brehm and concerned members of the University community demonstrated a disagreement about the “facts” on torture.\nAbout 30 students, faculty members and concerned Bloomington residents turned up to question Brehm on an anti-torture resolution her organization approved last summer. That resolution has been criticized by activists as not having done enough to end the suspected torturing of non-citizen prisoners.\nWhile the meeting’s discussion of the resolution was often heated, participants did not attack the IU psychology professor personally. Rather, many expressed a concern that a continued presence by psychologists at detention centers such as Guantanamo Bay in Cuba legitimizes questioned government operations there.\nPresident Bush points to the continued psychologists’ presence at prisons as providing guidance to the interrogations, said IU Law professor Dawn Johnsen during the meeting. \nStill, the actual role psychologists play in interrogations was debated itself. Brehm said psychologists only acted in an advisory role during questionings, working with interrogators to develop effective strategies that will elicit “accurate information.”\nThe controversy surrounding the Association’s resolution stems from a rejected moratorium of psychologists at interrogation sites. That amendment was turned down at the organization’s conference last August, but debate among some psychologists continues. Some former members of the Association have quit in protest, while hundreds of others are refusing to pay dues, according to an organization spokesman. \nSimilar professional organizations such as the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association already passed resolutions similar to the psychologist’s rejected one. \nWhen questioned about these other policies, Brehm responded those resolutions largely proved less effective than the regulations set forth by the American Psychological Association’s. \n“All of our ethical policies are based on individual responsibility,” Brehm said. “If you violate the behaviors that are prescribed then, if it is a serious violation, we’ll kick you out of the association and you may not be able to make a living anymore. It is that basic.”\nBrehm acknowledged, however, that it’s often tough to prove a psychologist’s wrongdoing. \nDespite insistence by some attendees that psychologists played a more active role in conducting interrogations, Brehm said she thinks psychologists usually are not even present in interrogation cells. Instead, Brehm said she thinks psychologists observed interrogations from behind one-way mirrors. In that role, they can serve as government watchdogs, ensuring interrogators do not torture prisoners. \n“We have great confidence that at least most of our members are really good people and that they would not do bad things,” Brehm said, adding her belief that psychologists had the ability to be heroes in fighting against torture. \nThose expectations are exactly the problem, said New York University psychology professor Beth Shinn. The psychologist had been a member of the American Psychological Association since the 1980’s, but resigned following last August’s resolution. \nPsychologists are ordinary people who are affected by the situations in which they find themselves, Shinn said. It’s unrealistic to believe that psychologists will always act as superheroes standing up to the government in order to stop torture, she said. \nA student contingent, led mostly by the activist group Indiana Students Against War, along with faculty and community organizations, showed up to question the policy. \nParts of last summer’s resolution are too ambiguous, said graduate student Sandrine Catris. In addition, Brehm’s uncertainty on specifics regarding interrogation sites made it difficult for Catris to take a firm stance on the issue. \nThroughout the meeting, Brehm was uncertain on specifics regarding the controversial interrogation sites. She said she has never been to detention centers like Guantanamo Bay’s and as a result could not specifically discuss conditions there. \nRegardless, Brehm’s stance on the resolution was strong. It’s a resolution she believes proves effective in stopping torture. \n“To be a psychologist who treats people, it is a deeply engrained sense of ethics,” Brehm said. “So that’s the way we do business as an association.”
