The Blog

Ahem. If there truly are nepotism/cronyism ties here, then why didn't this Mr. Sagan do the correct thing, which would have been to recuse himself from the ad hoc committee? I mean, in knowing full well that some good investigative journalist might uncover any "close friend" ties, why wouldn't the "close friend" realize how ridiculously arrogant it looks to try to pass one's self off as an objective member on an ad hoc committee investigating this whole issue? Or is that the point, that the arrogance runs so deep that it doesn't seem to matter? Most intelligent readers are probably more comfortable with more than one source verifying and reporting on any "close friend" types of cronyist ties to the person whose behavior is being reviewed, but if this is verified, again and again, there's some serious explaining to do over at NU.

The "investigation" is a sham., Miner puts it out correctly, Spett and Zorn have proof and the sham committee has conjecture. Oh, these evaluations sound like something he quoted, must be okay! Please. If I'd've tried to turn something like that in at Medill I'd've gotten a Medill F.

Excellent reporting on the panel's conflicts of interest. The provost, the dean and the committee members should all be ashamed of themselves. I hope all NU alumni protest this farce by boycotting the university during its fundraising drives.

Maybe the excellent Reader reporters should do some more digging and see if there are any other committees, boards and councils over at the other NU schools that lack sufficient conflict-of-interest concerns written into the bylaws. Just how widespread is this governance structure that some might perceive to be a tad ethically challenged? I know there's a policy where employees of the university can use their employee discounts to take classes, hence being in a dual role, they also qualify as bona fide students, which allows them to join the various student councils and student advisory boards. But it's common knowledge that some council and board members are also married to faculty members who teach at the same University. Shouldn't those people be limited to being members, but without full Officer status complete with voting privileges on issues that may arise? That's so inappropriate an arrangement. Can you imagine a student without such cushy internal ties to the University, where they don't have a spouse teaching there and they don't collect a paycheck from the same school while taking classes, and then they have a grievance of some sort? It's clearly not a level playing field for the plain old ordinary students versus those who work on campus and have a husband bringing in a check for teaching classes within the very same school in which his wife holds a student council and a board position. This would be easy enough to manage if they were allowed membership, but not full-blown Officer status complete with voting privilieges where they may end up voting on issues concerning students who don't have such cushy ties to the University. There are ways to regulate that stuff by having good bylaws and various levels of privilege. So, while not entirely sure of just how widespread this is, it might make for a very very interesting story angle if someone did some serious investigative journalism and found out just how many people sit on so-called student boards while they are outright married to faculty (who may be fraternizing with other faculty that students without such cushy ties may, at some point, bring forth a grievance about). The deck, internally, seems to be stacked so that any issues brought forth by ordinary students sort of ends up filtered through this mass of nepotism and possible bias that may arise. If Joe from Idaho moves to Chicago to take classes at NU, and he joins a Student Council, I think he's on an entirely different playing field, politically, than Sue, who is also on a Student Council, but has hubby Steve collecting a nice paycheck from the same University. If Joe has a grievance with a faculty member that Sue and Steve possibly go out to dinner with on their own time, how is this not a potential fairness problem? Seriously. Look into these boards and councils. There's more to be uncovered, no doubt. People don't join organizations where they feel they may have zero impact due to bias and nepotism within the system; they can easily volunteer their time elsewhere, like teaching kids to read, for example.

Actually, I think our daily newspaers are missing the broader story and the NU Provost committee has missed the more important point. Whether or not Dead Lavine made up a quote is only one event in a pattern of concerns. The broader concern is whether or not this is the guy who should be leading at 21st Century Journalism school. I actually support and respect some of the changes to the Medill curriculum--particularly the introduction of multimedia skills and publishing economics. However, these changes appear to have been made without total support of very skilled and responsible faculty. Also, the ethical backbone and civic duty inherent in the Journalism tradition seems to have been reduced or minimized to insignificanse. Should Northwestern endorse a Dean who makes decisions inconsistent with faculty governance and the tradition and context of his program's discipline? Should Northwestern support a Dean who is not bothered by accusations of a lack of accuracy and accountability in his writing? Is this the kind of guy who makes up stuff to make himself and his ideas look good? I think NU and our papers need to answer those questions in the broader context of the evaluation of Dean Lavine's qualifications to hold his job. Len Strazewski Medill BSJ 1975 Acting Director of the Graduate Program in Journalism at Columbia College Chicago

I am a Medill senior looking for a job. As if the market weren't hard enough right now, my Medill degree is tarnished with this disgrace. I would like my money back please.