University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

What's Wrong With B.P. Publicity?

It was with some degree of
disgust that I read Friday's
letter and editorial comment
concerning the "crass
commercialism" associated
with the "Mr. B.P." publicity.
As is often the case in your
newspaper, both the letter and
the comment reflected an
ignorance of facts both of the
situation as it exists and of
basketball in general.

Those who have been active
in promoting postcards,
bumper stickers and records
have not been doing so for any
commercial purposes; indeed,
they will probably lose money
in the process. They have acted
for several reasons: interest in
helping Barry earn the
All-American status he deserves
(as your comment aptly
pointed out), a genuine liking
for Barry, his attitude and
contribution to the school, and
a real joy and pride in the
team's success and what it has
meant to the community after
many years of draught.

If many of you
sophisticated collegians find
this "sophomoric" or "silly",
please recognize that there are
many of us "kids" under 17
and over 25 who love every
minute of it. Please humor us!

Probably the worst offense
of all came with your comment
encouraging Mr. Parkhill's
avoidance of 10 point games.
As anyone who follows
basketball knows, no one
consistently shoots 20 point
games. When a player plays
three games in one week and
scores more than 20 points in
two out of those three, that
comment appears a bit
ridiculous.

And to imply that Barry
Parkhill doesn't give 100% to
everygame is both cruel and
absurd. I hope in the future
you will consider the effect
this type of thoughtless
comment can have on a player
and even on the outcome of
future games.

Televise Wahoos!

In an effort to get the Duke
game televised on February 19
on Cablevision we are asking
the student community to
phone and write the following
people:

Steve Sebo U-Hall
296-3929

Eugene Corrigan U-Hall
Production
Manager-Cablevision (324
W. Main St.)
President—WCHV

These people have the
power to initiate action to get
this game televised. If enough
interest is shown by the
student body a suitable
agreement may be reached by
each authority. A concentrated
effort is needed immediately to
obtain the desired results.

Evasive Answers

In discussions I had at
University Night with Dean
Titus and his assistant Terry
Dan I was very much
impressed by their
single minded evasiveness and
unswerving dedication to
convince the students to which
they spoke that their overhaul
of first-year housing was right.
Unfortunately, I was not
impressed by the fact that I
never got a direct answer.
Trying to get to the truth was
like trying to pull teeth (to use
a hackneyed expression).
Despite Dean Titus's insistence
that there will be no
substantial changes, there will
be many changes, basically in
attitude.

What has not been fully
explained is that the duties of
the Resident Staff
Coordinators (graduate
students) will be strictly
within the Student Affairs
Office. They will live in the
dorms only as remuneration
for their services. Thus, Mr.
Titus has created a
bureaucracy confined to his
office which will plan
activities, which, in effect, will
contain very little student
input. This involves
considerable consolidation and
centralization of functions
into the Office of Student
Affairs. Such centralization
has never been accompanied
by a decrease in power and
control.

Mr. Titus could not control
the Resident Advisors. If he
had been able to, he would not
have considered them an
"expendable luxury". He has
solved his problem by
eliminating his most effective
opposition. Mr. Titus's rhetoric
about "Under-graduate input"
(to which he referred
constantly during our
discussion) is just that:
rhetoric. Undergraduates,
not having
the experience, could not
possibly oppose him as well as
(former) Resident Advisors.
The upshot of the whole
system is that there will be
more relatively inexperienced
people than at present, people
who will obviously be more
willing to "toe the line".

Mr. Titus told me that the
quality of the resident
assistants (counselors) will not
change, but those
independent-minded people
who disagree with the system
will not be interested in
becoming resident assistants,
in which case the quality of
people in such positions must
deteriorate.