[brianstl]

billikendave, on Jul 7 2008, 12:38 PM, said:

Then you must not be looking very closely. He has truly transformed SLU. He doubled the size of the campus and it hardly is reminiscent of the commuter school from the 80s. Don't kid yourself into thinking that there aren't as many "dead bodies" as fountains on campus. Many think he sold SLU's Catholic soul when he chose Tenat over SSM for the hospital and for TIF money for the new arena.

He may be tough and ruthless in business, but that is not the same as killing political opponents. You may not like the guy, but he doesn't approach the level of a Putin. If students don't like what is being done at the paper they are free to start their own without the backing of the school. Too many people seem more than willing to always try to morally equate something they don't like to something that is really horrifying. It is pretty intellectually lazy.

Biondi always takes the shots in these situations and that is his job. This is one case that Biondi is not the boogeyman. One of the schools employees tried to openly defy him and steal the paper's name at the same time. By the way it wasn't just The University News he tried to steal, but also the use of SLU for a paper.

Quote

Meyer said he formed the nonprofit corporation using the name of The University News and SLU in case students wanted to take the newspaper off campus.

[Pistol]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 01:01 PM, said:

He may be tough and ruthless in business, but that is not the same as killing political opponents. You may not like the guy, but he doesn't approach the level of a Putin. If students don't like what is being done at the paper they are free to start their own without the backing of the school. Too many people seem more than willing to always try to morally equate something they don't like to something that is really horrifying. It is pretty intellectually lazy.

Biondi always takes the shots in these situations and that is his job. This is one case that Biondi is not the boogeyman. One of the schools employees tried to openly defy him and steal the paper's name at the same time. By the way it wasn't just The University News he tried to steal, but also the use of SLU for a paper.

Intellectually lazy? I thought the Putin comparison was pretty accurate. Just as Putin claims Russia has a free press when his opponents in the press have turned up dead, Biondi claims his strong-arm tactics with the U News were to correct "grammatical errors." Riiiiight, Father. Biondi hasn't killed anyone, but the core of my analogy holds true: both leaders have lied to the people while silencing their voices. Please don't characterize a slight flair for the dramatic as intellectual laziness.

You also missed my other main point when you said that Biondi is in charge of a private institution and may censor the newspaper as he sees fit. While that on a fundamental level is true, you are first agreeing with me that he is censoring the student paper of his university and then validating his actions. The point is that Father Biondi is censoring the student newspaper. I would hope that this bothers people enough to do something.

Avis Meyer saw this for what it was: a leader exercising his power in the worst kind of way. Instead of putting his head down and taking it, he decided to use the legal system to take the newspaper back for the students. It isn't an ego grab on his part, just a response to Biondi's ego grab. I think it's an impressive move. The students need an ally to rally around against the president who took their paper, and Meyer is sticking his neck out for them.

I don't know if I would have even thought to challenge it legally in that way, but what I would have done is to rally the concerned members of the staff and other students to produce an independent paper to challenge and hopefully overtake a bland, amateurish, heavily-censored student newspaper.

[billikendave]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 01:01 PM, said:

He may be tough and ruthless in business, but that is not the same as killing political opponents. You may not like the guy, but he doesn't approach the level of a Putin. If students don't like what is being done at the paper they are free to start their own without the backing of the school. Too many people seem more than willing to always try to morally equate something they don't like to something that is really horrifying. It is pretty intellectually lazy.

Biondi always takes the shots in these situations and that is his job. This is one case that Biondi is not the boogeyman. One of the schools employees tried to openly defy him and steal the paper's name at the same time. By the way it wasn't just The University News he tried to steal, but also the use of SLU for a paper.

You are correct. Biondi hasn't murdered people. Metaphors and similies are "intellectually lazy" literary devices.

Meyer registered for a nonprofit corporation entitled "The University News, a student voice servicing Saint Louis University since 1921." He dissolved it 3-4 months after creating it after getting a "cease and desist" letter. The problem was remedied. The rest at this point is ego. He can't do it directly because Meyer is tenured. The lawsuit is not about the U News. Its about putting opponents of Biondi on notice that he will use the power of SLU to destroy you if you take him on.

I would say that he is leaving the head of a traitor by the clock tower to keep faculty in line but I guess that is intellectually lazy.....

[brianstl]

Pistol, on Jul 7 2008, 02:27 PM, said:

Intellectually lazy? I thought the Putin comparison was pretty accurate. Just as Putin claims Russia has a free press when his opponents in the press have turned up dead, Biondi claims his strong-arm tactics with the U News were to correct "grammatical errors." Riiiiight, Father. Biondi hasn't killed anyone, but the core of my analogy holds true: both leaders have lied to the people while silencing their voices. Please don't characterize a slight flair for the dramatic as intellectual laziness.

It is intellectually lazy. The paper belongs to the Jesuits and it is their right to control (through Biondi) the content as they see fit. Just as the Post is the property of Lee Enterprises and they control the content of their paper. Biondi would have to be trying to shut down the Post for your comparison to be close to being correct. Biondi is not using his power shut down all voices of dissent in the public square or even all dissent at the school newspaper.

Quote

Avis Meyer saw this for what it was: a leader exercising his power in the worst kind of way. Instead of putting his head down and taking it, he decided to use the legal system to take the newspaper back for the students. It isn't an ego grab on his part, just a response to Biondi's ego grab. I think it's an impressive move. The students need an ally to rally around against the president who took their paper, and Meyer is sticking his neck out for them.

That wasn't Avis's call to make. His is an employee of the university. He openly defied his boss, tried to steal the paper's name and steal the use of the initials SLU. He is lucky to still have a job, imo.

[bonwich]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 02:49 PM, said:

It is intellectually lazy. The paper belongs to the Jesuits and it is their right to control (through Biondi) the content as they see fit.

Now who's being "intellectually lazy"? (Or perhaps you missed that binding legal ruling about Saint Louis University not being controlled by a "religious creed.")

[billiken_roy]

brian, i know i said i would back out of this discussion but most of your argument is based on a assumption that avis meyer was trying to make a financial windfall with his actions. i am just 99.99999999% sure that just wasnt the case.

[Tonka]

Brian,

You have hit the nail on the head in your posts.

I do know Avis Meyer and his family. He is married to one of the sweetest women in the world and his son's death was tragic.

Anybody who had Avis Meyer for class knows what a dynamic teacher he is and his class was one of the few that you looked forward to. However this should not clear him of his wrongdoing in this matter. If anybody thinks Avis Meyer is not enjoying the limelight on this, simply doesn't know Avis Meyer. This is a case of pure disobedience on his part and it has been for a while. Avis acting as a renegade is exactly what drew so many students towards him.

I certainly appreciate Avis' hard work and definitely his passion but when you are employed by somebody, you have to be a subordinate as well.

I hope this situation doesn't taint Avis' career as his teaching and enthusiasm for students speaks volumes and should stand alone from this. But, in this particular situation, Avis needs to let go of the ego and know that this is a private institution that has let him bend the rules many times through the years. This time he just went too far. I don't fault him his mistake, but it's time for him to let it go.

[brianstl]

bonwich, on Jul 7 2008, 02:06 PM, said:

Now who's being "intellectually lazy"? (Or perhaps you missed that binding legal ruling about Saint Louis University not being controlled by a "religious creed.")

Your right, it is controlled by a board. It is the board's right to do what it wants with the paper.

[brianstl]

billiken_roy, on Jul 7 2008, 02:09 PM, said:

brian, i know i said i would back out of this discussion but most of your argument is based on a assumption that avis meyer was trying to make a financial windfall with his actions. i am just 99.99999999% sure that just wasnt the case.

I don't think that is what motivated him. I have heard nothing but good things about him. It doesn't matter what his motivations were, his actions were way out of line.

[Pistol]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 01:49 PM, said:

It is intellectually lazy. The paper belongs to the Jesuits and it is their right to control (through Biondi) the content as they see fit. Just as the Post is the property of Lee Enterprises and they control the content of their paper. Biondi would have to be trying to shut down the Post for your comparison to be close to being correct. Biondi is not using his power shut down all voices of dissent in the public square or even all dissent at the school newspaper.

That wasn't Avis's call to make. His is an employee of the university. He openly defied his boss, tried to steal the paper's name and steal the use of the initials SLU. He is lucky to still have a job, imo.

So if the University and/or its president (or any boss or company, for that matter) does something that you as an employee, educator, and free citizen know is wrong, you think the best course of action is to do nothing because you aren't the one in power? Believe it or not, people in power are not always right. To stretch it out with a little more intellectual laziness, I'm glad that our country's founding fathers did not keep quiet when they had to endure taxation without representation. I don't know about you, but there's no way I'd spend a career grumbling under my breath that my bosses are running and unethical company. I'd either challenge the system or find a new company.

When a university removes any degree of academic freedom from its students and professors, it has counterproductive effects down the road. Students and professors, even at private or religious universities, should have every right to criticize the institution and its leadership when they feel they are misrepresented in any way. Schools like Stanford, Northwestern, and Georgetown didn't develop reputations like theirs by setting strict guidelines about what its students and faculty could say and do. They allow them to express what they want and it fosters an environment of ideas and intellectual growth and pays dividends for the schools. Avis Meyer chose an unusual way to combat Father Biondi, but he took the side of the students and freedom of speech.

It pains me to see my alma mater silencing its students. Biondi and his cronies sometimes exercise their power in ways that detriments the University more than it helps it. If he wants to stand by his vow to make SLU the top Jesuit university in the country, now is the time to stand by his words and let his students say what they want. Only when this happens will SLU trend more in the direction of Georgetown and Boston College than in the direction of Bob Jones, Liberty, and Oral Roberts.

[brianstl]

Pistol, on Jul 7 2008, 02:32 PM, said:

So if the University and/or its president (or any boss or company, for that matter) does something that you as an employee, educator, and free citizen know is wrong, you think the best course of action is to do nothing because you aren't the one in power? Believe it or not, people in power are not always right. To stretch it out with a little more intellectual laziness, I'm glad that our country's founding fathers did not keep quiet when they had to endure taxation without representation. I don't know about you, but there's no way I'd spend a career grumbling under my breath that my bosses are running and unethical company. I'd either challenge the system or find a new company.

When a university removes any degree of academic freedom from its students and professors, it has counterproductive effects down the road. Students and professors, even at private or religious universities, should have every right to criticize the institution and its leadership when they feel they are misrepresented in any way. Schools like Stanford, Northwestern, and Georgetown didn't develop reputations like theirs by setting strict guidelines about what its students and faculty could say and do. They allow them to express what they want and it fosters an environment of ideas and intellectual growth and pays dividends for the schools. Avis Meyer chose an unusual way to combat Father Biondi, but he took the side of the students and freedom of speech.

It pains me to see my alma mater silencing its students. Biondi and his cronies sometimes exercise their power in ways that detriments the University more than it helps it. If he wants to stand by his vow to make SLU the top Jesuit university in the country, now is the time to stand by his words and let his students say what they want. Only when this happens will SLU trend more in the direction of Georgetown and Boston College than in the direction of Bob Jones, Liberty, and Oral Roberts.

If Avis wanted to make a true stand on principal he would have quit his tenured job. It looks like he tried to make a stand by backdooring something that didn't belong to him and at the same time trying to take no risk to his own well being because of his tenure. It now appears that he misjudged his own risk and is now trying to wage a sympathy campaign to minimize his losses. That is a terrible example for his students to follow.

If Biondi really wanted to crack the whip on dissent there are a lot of other targets that he would go after before Avis. Avis is a target because of what he did as an employee of the unversity and the fact he tried to steal something (no matter what his motives) that didn't belong to him.

[billiken_roy]

how can you in good consciousness teach journalism if you did not stand up for free press and no censorship? wouldnt your teachings ring a little hollow if avis didnt? for him to be a credible teacher, i dont see how he couldnt stand up for his positions in some manner. what could he have done differently and still been a credible teacher of journalism and advisor to the paper? i mean slu kind of put themselves in this boat imo.

[billikendave]

Tonka, on Jul 7 2008, 02:12 PM, said:

Brian,

You have hit the nail on the head in your posts.

I do know Avis Meyer and his family. He is married to one of the sweetest women in the world and his son's death was tragic.

Anybody who had Avis Meyer for class knows what a dynamic teacher he is and his class was one of the few that you looked forward to. However this should not clear him of his wrongdoing in this matter. If anybody thinks Avis Meyer is not enjoying the limelight on this, simply doesn't know Avis Meyer. This is a case of pure disobedience on his part and it has been for a while. Avis acting as a renegade is exactly what drew so many students towards him.

I certainly appreciate Avis' hard work and definitely his passion but when you are employed by somebody, you have to be a subordinate as well.

I hope this situation doesn't taint Avis' career as his teaching and enthusiasm for students speaks volumes and should stand alone from this. But, in this particular situation, Avis needs to let go of the ego and know that this is a private institution that has let him bend the rules many times through the years. This time he just went too far. I don't fault him his mistake, but it's time for him to let it go.

I agree he went to far. But what is the point of the lawsuit -- what is SLU seeking other than a pound of flesh? (sorry brian -- another lazy metaphor/allusion to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice) Okay, from what i've seen he's relented and withdrew the corporation that he set up. Should he be out as an "unofficial advisor" and not allowed to voluntarily help students? I guess but how do you effectively do that. Security to keep him out? Have Biondi follow him around on his golf cart to make sure he stays out of newspaper office?

SLU chose a federal lawsuit. In my opinion, the worst of all possible options because it makes a bad situation worse. It creates headlines, blogs such as this and bad will.

Tonka -- I agree Ego is driving this whole issue. But takes two stubborn and ego driven people to get where we are. Toss in a mess of bad decisions on both sides and here you go. At the end of the day, all of this could probably be handled internally but SLU (and their lawyers) felt that bullying with a federal lawsuit was the way to go.

[brianstl]

billiken_roy, on Jul 7 2008, 03:45 PM, said:

how can you in good consciousness teach journalism if you did not stand up for free press and no censorship? wouldnt your teachings ring a little hollow if avis didnt? for him to be a credible teacher, i dont see how he couldnt stand up for his positions in some manner. what could he have done differently and still been a credible teacher of journalism and advisor to the paper? i mean slu kind of put themselves in this boat imo.

Well he could have started by explaining to the students that editors and publisher will decide want actually ends up in a paper. If you want to have true freedom to print want ever you want you must self-publish and take the risk yourself. It would probably be a good idea if you are going to do that you don't try to take what doesn't belong to you and that you should be prepared to take responsibilty for your actions.

[Pistol]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

If Avis wanted to make a true stand on principal he would have quit his tenured job. It looks like he tried to make a stand by backdooring something that didn't belong to him and at the same time trying to take no risk to his own well being because of his tenure. It now appears that he misjudged his own risk and is now trying to wage a sympathy campaign to minimize his losses. That is a terrible example for his students to follow.

If Biondi really wanted to crack the whip on dissent there are a lot of other targets that he would go after before Avis. Avis is a target because of what he did as an employee of the unversity and the fact he tried to steal something (no matter what his motives) that didn't belong to him.

Roy and Dave make excellent points in response to this, but I just wanted to hit this one more time: Biondi brought this on himself when he decided to take control of the student newspaper and tell a bold-faced lie to the University community that it was for "grammatical errors" and "poor editing." Meyer hit him back hard by pressing him legally and a storm of bad press and ill will - mostly directed toward Biondi, who deserves it - have come along with the legal costs.

Lesson learned, Father Biondi. Next time you have a problem with what's being printed about you, you should 1) act in a manner that is more in line with the expectations of the faculty and student body, or 2) write an editorial.

[billiken_roy]

technically the name "university news" did not belong to slu either. if it did, it wouldnt have been available to copywrite in the first place.

slu didnt take the steps to cover their bases in the first place be it laziness or cheapness.

the fact avis withdrew things immediately upon notice he would have to fight for the name should show he had no financial interests in such.

as to your answer to what avis was supposed to do, basically tell students that as journalists they would always cave to their employers even if they knew the employers were wrong or they could quit and go elsewhere? that's a good message.

[brianstl]

billikendave, on Jul 7 2008, 03:49 PM, said:

I agree he went to far. But what is the point of the lawsuit -- what is SLU seeking other than a pound of flesh? (sorry brian -- another lazy metaphor/allusion to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice) Okay, from what i've seen he's relented and withdrew the corporation that he set up. Should he be out as an "unofficial advisor" and not allowed to voluntarily help students? I guess but how do you effectively do that. Security to keep him out? Have Biondi follow him around on his golf cart to make sure he stays out of newspaper office?

SLU chose a federal lawsuit. In my opinion, the worst of all possible options because it makes a bad situation worse. It creates headlines, blogs such as this and bad will.

Tonka -- I agree Ego is driving this whole issue. But takes two stubborn and ego driven people to get where we are. Toss in a mess of bad decisions on both sides and here you go. At the end of the day, all of this could probably be handled internally but SLU (and their lawyers) felt that bullying with a federal lawsuit was the way to go.

My intellectually lazy comment had to do with the demonizing of Biondi and the implied martyrdom of Avis in Pistol's post. It was a total misrepresentation of what happened.

[brianstl]

billiken_roy, on Jul 7 2008, 04:06 PM, said:

technically the name "university news" did not belong to slu either. if it did, it wouldnt have been available to copywrite in the first place.

slu didnt take the steps to cover their bases in the first place be it laziness or cheapness.

the fact avis withdrew things immediately upon notice he would have to fight for the name should show he had no financial interests in such.

as to your answer to what avis was supposed to do, basically tell students that as journalists they would always cave to their employers even if they knew the employers were wrong or they could quit and go elsewhere? that's a good message.

Yes it is, if you plan on working for someone else. It is the way the real world works. If they plan on working for someone else they can not plan on publicly defying them and getting away with it. If you don't like the place you work find a place that is more in tune with your beliefs.

[billiken_roy]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 04:11 PM, said:

Yes it is, if you plan on working for someone else. It is the way the real world works. If they plan on working for someone else they can not plan on publicly defying them and getting away with it. If you don't like the place you work find a place that is more in tune with your beliefs.

but doesnt journalism integrity make this normal workplace practice entirely different in the media industry? i mean i would think that a journalist has to be given the freedom to speak and write the truth or even what they believe to be the truth or else what kind of media would be left for us to read, watch or listen to?

[Pistol]

brianstl, on Jul 7 2008, 03:11 PM, said:

Yes it is, if you plan on working for someone else. It is the way the real world works. If they plan on working for someone else they can not plan on publicly defying them and getting away with it. If you don't like the place you work find a place that is more in tune with your beliefs.

BEGIN SARCASM:
Instead of seeing an injustice and working to change it, just accept it for what it is. A lot gets done that way, and I trust that those in power will always make the best decisions for everyone.
END SARCASM.

To me, this is exactly kind of thinking that prevents anything from getting done, a more dangerous kind of thinking than it gets credit for- complacency. This is why shareholders are elevated above employees and consumers, this is why governments are ineffective layers upon layers of bureaucracy, this is why people contribute to the same systems that oppress them. How about this- if you see the wrongs done by your current bosses and have the integrity enough to realize that you don't agree with them and therefore will leave anyway, why don't you go ahead and challenge them? If you lose, oh well, you were leaving anyway and you make a statement and if you win, then the wrong has been righted and you can keep working there in good conscience.