Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1952 [PAGE 770]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

I95i]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

867

period of the broadcasts was from September 17, 1950, to June g, 1951. During this period of time Quincy Howe, visiting professor of Journalism and Com^ munications, broadcast on 44 days. On 10 of the days Donald Brown, assistant professor of Journalism and Communications and news director of Station WILL, broadcast. On 2 days Gilbert Steiner, research associate of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs, broadcast. On one day Arthur Bestor, associate professor of History, broadcast, and on one day Harold Salzman, radio programmer assistant of Station WILL, broadcast. On two dates during this period there were no broadcasts. These broadcasts were of 5 minutes duration and were news analyses given each morning at 7:40 AM and repeated at 11:55 AM from Monday through Friday. Mr. Howe was brought to the University of Illinois as visiting professor of Journalism and Communications for the academic year beginning September 1950 and ending June 1951. He has been recommended for a permanent appointment beginning next September. He is a distinguished journalist, one time member of the editorial staff of The Atlantic Monthly, is a former editor of Living Age and, in more recent years, was a news analyst for the Columbia Broadcasting System. Minute analysis made of the manuscript by your committee indicates that while Professor Howe dealt with very controversial subjects, we do not consider that the analyses of the subjects discussed by Professor Howe are detrimental to the best interest of the University; further, that inasmuch as Station WILL is endeavoring to provide the kind and type of program that will manifest interest of their listeners and equal to the programs provided by other radio stations, it is the view of your committee that as long as the position taken by this or any other commentator is not prejudicial to free enterprise or the American way of life, there is not any justification for the Board of Trustees to censor, condemn or criticize the commentator, station or the administrative officers of the University of Illinois for broadcasts of this type and character. The letter of June 6 from Mr. Lyle deals with the activities of President Stoddard in connection with the UNESCO. Your committee has also considered the content of the criticism in this communication. There are many important factors, as we view it, that have prompted President Stoddard to take an active part in this work. What can or will be accomplished by this program perhaps can be indicated as problematical so far as the rank and file of American people are concerned, but like all other programs that are launched it is necessary for the leaders in their fields to not only initiate the ideas but to foster and nurture them. In view of this premise the committee can see no reason that it can advance for criticizing the activity in this program on the part of President Stoddard, particularly appreciating as we do his qualifications. We do not believe there has been an adverse effect upon the activities of the University because of the interest which he has taken in the UNESCO. Obviously, it is necessary for President Stoddard to be absent from the campus and in fact the country in order to be effective in this work. This viewpoint of your committee has been considered in light of the need for Doctor Stoddard's attention to the administration of the' affairs of the University. It is our understanding that the President's term on this committee will soon expire and that he can not succeed himself to another term. The third subject, that having to do with a letter of June 8 from Professor Kemmerer regarding the controversy in the College of Commerce, has also been reviewed by your committee, including the recent report of the Advisory Committee. It is our view that considerable damage has been done to the University thru this controversy and the delay in its disposition. Your committee has a very strong view that it is highly desirable in disposing of this controversy to first dispose of the selection of the Dean for the College of Commerce, and that with promptness. It is your committee's belief that this selection can be made without delay and that the proper selection would go a long way in overcoming the present unsatisfactory condition. This we feel is the first step, following which the new Dean should be afforded an opportunity to review all reports and recommendations, thereafter submitting his recommendations to the President of the University as to what further steps should be taken. In the meantime, the committee suggests that the Board receive any reports of progress in the College as submitted by the President of the University. The communications which you handed to us were returned to you June 14.