Letters to the Editor
What’s Mine is Mine and What’s Yours is Mine
To the Editor:
Greetings. Thank you for publishing Paul Collins’s “What’s Mine Is Mine, and What’s Yours Is Mine” essay in the most recent edition of your magazine (Adjunct Advocate, March/April 2006). As an online instructor who also spends a fair bit of time as a course content creator, I found Mr. Collins’s article to be both highly informative and tremendously relative to the work I’m doing. I’ve been fortunate to have very positive working relationships with the universities I’ve interacted with to this point, but I will also be reading the fine print in future contracts with a much keener eye thanks to this article! Kudos to your publication for raising awareness on this topic.
Timothy J. Dey M.D.
The Dey Group
Taping Liberal Left America
To the Editor:
I just wanted to send you a note regarding your article (“Taping Liberal Left America,” Adjunct Advocate March/April 2006). I have considered subscribing in the past, but the Bruce Thornton article has convinced me of your true agenda. The right wing of American politics, drunk with power of late, has taken it upon themselves to go after their opponents as though politics was a business that brooked no competition. They are particularly good at accusing others, especially the left, of what they themselves are guilty of, namely, attempted indoctrination.
That Dr. Bruce Thornton is David Horowitz’s lap dog is evident in this article. This kind of right-winger spew has no credibility, and does more to undermine democratic free speech than anything the left has ever done in this country. There’s a good review of Horowitz’s recent book by Robert McChesney to which I refer you. I’m sure you can Google it. So much for advocacy — you’ve made a mistake giving this right-wing clown the legitimacy of a front-page article. This isn’t providing balance, this is giving a radical, dogmatic voice the air of legitimacy it does not deserve. If you are going to print this drivel, you align yourself with such Nazi-esque screed that has no place in higher learning, unless you want jack-booted thugs monitoring the classroom — that’s the direction Thornton’s view points us toward. Goodbye.
Doug Harvey, Adjunct Professor of History
Johnson County Community College and Washburn University
Lawrence, KS
Editor:
Dr. Thorton’s essay was printed because it represents a viewpoint held by a large number of people (perhaps people outside academe, but a large number of people nonetheless). Furthermore, the essay is thoughtful and well-argued. The beauty of journalism is that one has the obligation to present differing opinions on the same subject. As such, I would invite Professor Harvey (or any reader) who disagrees with Dr. Thorton’s opinions to send along a piece which argues the opposite viewpoint. The Adjunct Advocate’s only editorial agenda is to solicit and print writing that is thought-provoking, well-written and original.
To the Editor:
I’ve taught at six universities, and all of them respect the views of faculty and students of different political persuasions. Most go out of their way to protect minority opinion, especially conservative views. Articles like this one feed the flames of hysterical claims made by whackos like David Horowitz. It’s just not true.
Alan Foster
Shippensburg University
Shippensburg, PA
To the Editor:
I do not allow taping of my lectures. This has nothing to do with trying to hide anything, but everything to do with protecting my Intellectual Property rights and maintaining the value of my presentations.
Taping of lectures violates the copyright laws when done without explicit permission of the performer. Both the performance and the lecture notes are protected by copyright. (I always have my first slide showing both a circle-c and a circle-p symbol to emphasize this point; and I register my material with the LOC copyright office so that I can sue for damages and penalties).
Use of the taping, if permission had been granted, is still limited to the rights granted. Absent any specific usage being explicitly authorized, the authorized taper is limited by law to personal use i.e. for use in reviewing the material while studying for the course. I suppose that news broadcasts would be included under fair use if they could get into the classroom to record a lecture. Whether an authorized student-taper could give his tapes to the media for their use is questionable but I suspect that they could probably do that legally. What they can’t do legally is give them to advocate groups for non editorial use of any kind. If this is a consideration than the lecturer should have written agreements with the students where they explicitly acknowledge by their signatures that the material is to only to be used personally and not transmitted to any third party.
The copyright law also prohibits such services that take notes and then reproduce them for sale to students who did not attend or other persons. Demanding the protection the law was designed to give is not wrong and is nothing to be ashamed of nor which should be questioned by anyone with a political axe to grind.
The safest course for lecturers is to forbid any and all mechanical recording of their presentations. This should be both announced and consistently enforced.
If some group wants to attend my lectures and take notes then let them buy a ticket or get permission from the school to enrol and then pay the tuition charges. Or let them contract with me to present a private lecture to their audience.
William Adams, PE, Ph.D.
Put a Sock In It, Will Ya?
To the Editor:
Should I put a sock in it? Maybe after I write this. I enjoyed Elizabeth Carter’s essay (“Ruminations on Academic Freedom, Professorial Rant, and the Sublime Virtue of Putting a Sock in It,” Adjunct Advocate March/April 2006), but I must say that I can’t support her idea that self-censorship is the answer to the current culture war on campus. The disputes cropping up are not the result of bad manners, but rather of virulent attacks by the right on the institution of higher education and the people who work as educators. As an adjunct, I don’t have the luxury of standing up for my beliefs at work. Perhaps if Ms. Carter understood this, she might think twice about suggesting a solution which does little more than blame those who have the least academic freedom for their lack of good sense and good manners.
Kevin de la Hoya
San Francisco, CA
To the Editor:
May I suggest that Elizabeth Carter put a sock in it? I don’t like being told to shut up and keep my opinions to myself. If I did, I’d live in Red China and teach at the University of Beijing. In America, citizens are still free to express themselves, thank you very much, including at work.
Lucy Smith
Philadelphia, PA
