I groaned audibly when I saw the front page of Tuesday’s Daily.

At first glance, the lead story seemed to be about a new group of students who felt so violated by the lack of Pepsi vending machines on campus that they had decided to spring into action.

Fortunately, the e-mail message that prompted the story was a joke perpetrated by a student who was trying to point out the absurdity of the soft drink debate that a few people who apparently have a lot of spare time have been engaged in.

But when I first saw it, I believed it could be true, and I bet many of you believed it, too.

That is probably the strongest sign that some of the things students on this campus choose to concern themselves with are really ridiculous.

We believed it.

When I read that the student wrote in his e-mail message that he would chain himself to ISU President Martin Jischke until he offered equality among soft drinks, I thought it seemed plausible, given the level of hysteria on this campus.

A little extreme, perhaps, but plausible.

The short version of this column would go as follows:

For the love of God, it’s only a soft drink! Get a life, will you?

But because I get paid according to how much I write, allow me to expand on that idea.

All of this started back in November when the Government of the Student Body Senate spent an hour debating whether or not the university should make commercial products available equally.

As a result, discussion on bills concerning the naming of the new student health center after retiring Vice President for Student Affairs Tom Thielen and allowing Department of Public Safety officers to carry guns were postponed.

In other words, real issues were put on hold so one senator could grind his ax about having to (gasp!) walk all the way to the Memorial Union for a Mountain Dew.

Senator David Ammann said he was “disgusted” about the Coke sign on the message board in front of Hilton Coliseum.

Ammann said his bill was meant to address commercialization of the campus, but many people got caught up in his dislike for Mellow Yellow that they missed the point.

Well, I got the point. I just happen to think the point is ridiculous.

First of all, what Ammann calls “commercialization” is more commonly known as free enterprise, and it exists in all facets of society. There is no reason to think that a college campus should be any different.

When you go to a restaurant and order a cola, the restaurant usually has either Pepsi or Coke. They never have both. That’s because part of the contract is that the restaurant not offer the competitor’s product.

Let’s say you go to a fast-food place and order a combo-meal. It consists of a hamburger so big it required the lives of three cows and an order of fries you have to strap to the hood of your car.

You also get a drink, and you want a Pepsi, but this restaurant has Coke. What do you do?

If you are among the people trying to save the world from commercialization, you probably whine and moan and vow to fight the insidious corporate influence of Coca-Cola until hell freezes over, and then fight it on the ice.

If you are a reasonable person, you take your Coke and go home.

The university took the Coke vending contract because it was the best deal. The officials charged with making that decision apparently forgot to consider the emotional well-being of the devout Pepsi consumers.

Or maybe they just thought that college students would have more important things to worry about than what’s in the pop machines.

---

Steven Martens is a senior in journalism and mass communication from Cedar Rapids.