Let me start by saying that I enjoy your paper. I give the people responsible for the Daily credit for putting out a fine paper. Normally the paper is even-handed and fair. There is one decision I don’t understand, however.

In the Friday, Dec. 5, issue of the Daily, a cover-page story, “And it’s back to the drawing board” states that the talks between The September 29th Movement and the Iowa State administration abruptly ended because The Movement was recording the talks in violation of guidelines set by the meetings conciliator. The use of the recorder is obviously a touchy issue for both groups. This is a well-written article, which I read with interest and found entertaining.

I don’t understand the choice of the article directly below the “Back to the drawing board” article, which is a transcript of the recording from the meeting. I think the first article made it clear through the use of quotes on the public record that the administration wanted the use of recording devices banned so that the contents of the meeting would remain confidential. I think keeping the meeting confidential ensures that the transcript of the meeting will not show up verbatim in a fairly high-circulation media outlet.

I think by printing the transcript, the Daily is taking the side of The September 29th Movement, saying that the recording was O.K. If that is what you think, and you want to print your opinions, fine. The paper has an opinion page just for ideas like that. Printing a transcript of a recording that isn’t supposed to exist is like selling a X-rated video of a former Baywatch actress and her rock-and-roll husband.

Was the article supposed to illustrate the point made in the other article? I really don’t think the transcript made any points that weren’t already made. Or was this a “exclusive” or “you-heard-it-here-first” thing? I don’t think the Daily needs to use tactics such as that. In all fairness, maybe your explanation was printed among the mysterious missing words behind the nifty graphics of the finger-pointing McGriff and Jischke.

Paul Busch

Ames