A Syracuse University official is recommending that the university reevaluate The Daily Orange’s relationship with SU, an action that could keep the paper from distributing on campus or leave it without a location from which to operate.

On Wednesday, SU spokesman Kevin Morrow mailed letters to members of the administration with this recommendation and several concerns he has with the paper.

The letter, which he sent to Chancellor Kenneth A. Shaw, Dean of Students Anastasia Urtz, Senior Vice President of Student Affairs Barry Wells, Associate Vice President of Public Relations Sandi Mulconry and The D.O., states that the paper is not best serving its readership and needs a review of its procedures. Because they have not yet received the letter, many officials chose to reserve comment.

In the letter, Morrow said he also asked the university to determine whether The D.O. is a student organization or an independent entity. Morrow refused to comment further about the contents of the letter.

“To do so would do a disservice to the people receiving it,” Morrow said.

On Friday, D.O. Editor in Chief Tito Bottitta and Managing Editor Ashleigh Graf met with Morrow and Director of Athletic Communications Sue Edson to discuss an editorial about media credential distribution during the NCAA Tournament East Regional Finals, which were held in the Carrier Dome. During this meeting, Morrow said he would write the letter.

The D.O., which at one time had four passes for the football season and three passes for basketball, now operates with three passes for football and two passes for basketball. This coming season the Sports Information Department will impose stricter guidelines for all student media that further limit passes for such media organizations.

It would be a mistake for the university to alter its relationship with The D.O. in response to this letter, said Student Press Law Center Executive Director Mark Goodman. The Student Press Law Center is an advocate for student free-press rights and provides information, advice and free legal assistance to student journalists.

“What it boils down to is that this is a blatant action to censor the paper,” Goodman said. “Any time punitive action is taken for the way something is written or the way news is gathered, it is censorship.”

If the university takes any action, it would set a dangerous precedent for other campus organizations, especially student groups that are completely funded by the university, Goodman said.

Since 1991, The D.O. has been financially independent from SU, tied to the university only in a 1999 agreement with Shaw to deliver on campus and rent the house at 744 Ostrom Ave., where content of the paper is produced. In the agreement, Shaw also stated that neither he nor any other campus administrator would control editorial content. (See box on page 3)

The letters should be delivered through campus mail either today or Friday, although Wells said Morrow delivered a copy of the letter to his office Wednesday. Wells was unable to read it because of meetings.

Shaw, who was out of town until late Tuesday, said he did not want to comment on the content of the letter before he read it, but referred to his Feb. 13 statement about The D.O. The statement, which Shaw delivered during a meeting of the University Senate, addressed the controversy about a comic that was interpreted as racially insensitive by many students.

“Indeed, freedom of the press has never been a blank check,” Shaw said in that statement. “Rightly or wrongly, editors and journalists in the real world of newspapers and magazines have been fired for printing material that runs counter to community standards in the past and will no doubt be in the future.

“I don’t mean to imply in any way that censorship of The Daily Orange is appropriate. Those who believe that a heavy hand is needed in this instance must think about the implications of such a position and the harm it could do to us as a place where truth can be sought without fear of reprisal.”

Urtz and Mulconry could not be reached for comment.

Morrow’s letter is beyond the normal recourse of action for the grievance he had about the editorial, Bottitta said.

“If he disagrees with what we do, he can write a letter to the editor,” Bottitta said.

Bottitta said he offered for Morrow and Edson to write letters to the editor but both declined. Since the only problems Morrow and Edson had with the editorial were based on opinion, they should not have taken it beyond a letter to the editor, said Bottitta, a junior information studies major.

Morrow also said that Edson planned to write a similar letter. Edson could not be reached for comment at her office or home.

At this point, the letter symbolizes little beyond a request, said David Rubin, dean of the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications. But if it is acted on, the survival of the paper would depend on how well The D.O. could handle the financial problems that would arise, he said.

“If (The D.O.) has the economic wherewithal then (it is) untouchable,” he said. “But if (it) doesn’t have the economic wherewithal, there will be serious issues, which is kind of like the real world.”

Managing editor Ashleigh Graf contributed to this story.

Published on April 17, 2002 at 12:00 pm