Mishka Zena

Date: October 7, 2006, 10:02 p.m.
To: Catherine Sweet-Windham <catherine.sweet-windham@gallaudet.edu>
CC: Mercy Coogan <mercy.coogan@gallaudet.edu>
Subject: Expression of concern

Dear Cathy:

During Friday’s luncheon between Faculty representataives and
Administrators (absent the Trustees), two concerns (among others) were
shared at our table:

a) the denial of access to campus by the media and their broadcasting
vehicles;

b) consistent dissemination of information to the campus by the PR
office, deemed to be one-sided.

I personally queried Mercy Coogan on Friday via email at 7:39 AM, well
before our luncheon, requesting clarification of the media access
matter. To date, I have not received a response from her. I find it
disappointing that the Chair of the Faculty would not have been
afforded a timely written response that could have been shared with my
colleagues.

Since the luncheon event, these two issues have grown considerably in
importance. Reports suggest that media access is now more difficult
than ever. If this is true, it raises concerns about the free flow of
information and ideas on our campus and beyond our gates.

The second issue involves the use of the Public Relations office (and
the PR Office’s own letterhead!) to disseminate a private letter from a
single student to the entire campus. Regardless of the import of David
King’s letter or the timeliness of his views, the Administration’s use
of campus media to present, time and time again, only a single
“official” perspective during a time of controversy makes one wonder
about the Institution’s commitment to the free exchange of ideas. Are
you planning on allowing similar access to others on campus who wish to
have their views shared widely?

In closing, let me add that these actions and policies do not strike me
as fully consistent with the spirit of President Jordan’s recent
pronouncements, in particular the following:

“In the course of dissent, the rights of all members of our community
must be protected.” [Approved summary of meeting of 8/28 between IKJ
and Faculty Reps.] While the media may not have a “right” to be on
private property and dissenters do not have a right to unencumbered
access to the  Public Relations distributions lists,  the selective and
highly controlled dissemination of information mediated by the
University strikes many of us an antithetical to the spirit of  free
inquiry and the liberal exchange of ideas that are the hallmarks of an
institution of higher learning.

Sincerely,

Mark Weinberg

Cc: University Faculty, Mercy Coogan