Of 73 papers, nearly 40 -- Harvard, Columbia, Notre Dame,
the University of Washington, Georgia Tech and the University
of Virginia among them -- rejected the Horowitz ad.
One of those was the Daily Cardinal, the Badger Herald's
rival at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Having watched
the Herald come under fire for its decision to run the ad,
the Cardinal chose to let the dust settle instead, explaining
in an editorial:
"UW-Madison campus, its record on diversity
under fire and its students of color enraged at The Badger
Herald's actions, was a tinderbox waiting to explode.
Reprinting the ad in The Daily Cardinal would have been
inflammatory to the point of burning a deep and hurtful scar
on students of color at UW-Madison."
Other student newspapers chose to tackle the issue of free
speech in explaining their rejection of the ad. Like the
Cardinal, the Observer at
Notre Dame chose to address the issue in an editorial:
In truth, the decision regarding
whether to print the advertisement is not a free speech issue,
but an issue of a newspaper's right to control its own content.
While we respect Mr. Horowitz's right to have and spread his
opinions, the First Amendment does not mandate his opinions
must appear in The Observer ... If Horowitz wanted to
stimulate a debate on reparations, he could have submitted his
viewpoint for publication in college opinion sections without
spending a dime."
Then, there were the school publications that sought a
balance between rejection and protests.
At San Francisco State University, the Golden Gate Xpress
voted to run articles and editorials examining reparations,
free speech and political correctness, thereby asserting its
role as a public forum for debate. ``I don't feel it's
censorship not to run the ad. It's censorship if we ignore
what he's saying,'' Niema Quiet, the paper's features editor,
told the San Jose Mercury News on March 27.
- At Yale University's Daily News, the paper's business
manager turned down the ad because of concerns that it could
offend readers or advertisers. But after negotiating with
Horowitz by e-mail, editors commissioned an op-ed piece, which
ran April 2 under the headline "Reflections of a Campus
Provocateur." In it, Horowitz explained his views and
complained about what he described as a leftist crusade
- The Harvard Crimson also refused the ad, but ran a legible
version of it in the paper's news columns, alongside a story
detailing the nationwide campus controversy.