Editorial: UCLA needs emergency notification system now

Friday, May 18, 2007

UCLA and university police proved Wednesday that, far from their recent assurances of campus safety, their emergency response does not provide nearly enough immediate notification, leaving the campus unaware of possible danger.

Around 1:30 p.m. on Wednesday, local authorities received reports of an individual in the possession of some sort of weapon - possibly a rifle - in Westwood's North Village.

The reports sent a swarm of Los Angeles Police Department cruisers to the North Village. Cars blocked several streets in an attempt to control traffic and prevent individuals from walking into potentially dangerous areas.

About three blocks away, UCLA continued to go about its business as if there were not a care in the world.

In the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, it is remarkable - and unacceptable - that any immediate danger to the UCLA community was not communicated promptly to the entire campus.

Given the recent announcements and assurances made by UCLA officials regarding campus safety, it is natural to think the university would have a short-term plan in place to deal with emergencies until a more comprehensive plan were in effect.

Thankfully, the individual was not in possession of a rifle, but rather a crossbow, and no one was injured. But the situation could have been very different - and more dangerous - based on the initial reports.

In a recent public meeting, Acting Chancellor Norman Abrams addressed how UCPD has been prepared for active-shooter situations since the 1999 Columbine shootings, so we know the police do have a plan in place.

Of course, it is not expected that at the slightest hint of danger UCLA would break out megaphones, sound alarms and call in the National Guard.

But to leave the community completely in the dark until more than an hour after the incident is over is simply unacceptable, and the university should be working more vigorously with UCPD to develop a response plan for reports of danger in and around UCLA.

As it was, many students, faculty and staff were left completely unaware of the situation unless they were at a computer to check either the UCPD or the Daily Bruin Web site for breaking news updates.

By the end of the day, the only notification of the incident sent to any members of the UCLA community came in the form of an e-mail by K.C. Kainsinger, UCPD emergency medical services manager, sent to the Campus Safety listserv at 4:33 p.m., well after the incident had been resolved.

One wonders why the one resource available to administrators - a campus-wide mass e-mail - was not utilized earlier to alert students, staff and faculty to the situation, a resource which could kill two birds with one stone by dispelling rumors about the incident simultaneously.

In the end, regardless of the endless reasons UCLA officials can provide in order to explain the response - or lack thereof - there is really no excuse.

The bottom line is that there was a potentially dangerous situation very near UCLA, in the heart of the off-campus student community, and both UCLA and UCPD did nothing to proactively alert campus community members.

This needs to change immediately. It is understandable that a stronger plan for emergency response is in the works, but basic responses, such as campus-wide notification, need to be in place now.

--

Original Source:<a href=http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2007/may/18/editorial-ucla-needs-emergency-notification-system/>
The Daily Bruin - May 18, 2007</a>

Editorial

The Daily Bruin

2007-07-13

Sara Hood

Saba Riazati <editor@media.ucla.edu>

eng

Scare response scrutinized

<i>Community members criticize level of communication during Wednesday&#39;s incident</i>

By Edward Truong
Friday, May 18, 2007

Some students and staff expressed concern that the university did not communicate quickly enough with the community following Wednesday&#39;s weapon scare in Westwood.

But officials said the community was not in danger and so they focused on controlling rumors.

L.A. police shut down several blocks in the North Village in response to reports of an armed individual in the area Wednesday afternoon. In the investigation, police found a crossbow rather than a gun, and university officials did not take any formal action on campus.

Nancy Greenstein, director of police community services for UCPD, said it was a "self-contained potential incident. ... The police (had) it under control."

"There appeared to be no risk to campus or population," she said.

But some believe the university should have informed students and staff about the incident sooner.

Ruth Tesfamichael, a second-year English student, said she had no real information about what was going on, except she heard rumors from another student that there was a gunman in the area.

"Word of mouth spread really quickly," she said. "Everyone was misinformed."

She said she hoped the university would have found a way to reach students.

"I expected an e-mail (from the university), but didn&#39;t get anything," she said.

Nancy Chakravarty, director of admissions for Corinne A. Seeds University Elementary School, said she was especially concerned about the lack of communication because parents were calling in to the school with questions and she was able to offer no response.

"We had no idea that anything was going on," Chakravarty said. "One of our teachers came up and asked what ... the helicopters (flying around the area) were for."

She said her staff was entirely unaware of the situation until concerned parents started contacting the office.

"Parents had called and said there had been a shooting on campus."

Lawrence Lokman, assistant vice chancellor of University Communications, called the incident a "rumor-control" issue for the university.

He said media relations officials spent Wednesday contacting City News Service and other media outlets to correct reports, such as KCBS&#39;s report of a "UCLA Gunman" which was later removed.

"We all realize we&#39;re in a fast media environment," he said. "These kinds of things always drive home (a) level of angst. ... (It&#39;s) important not to add to the angst."

Greenstein said e-mails were later sent out to various mailing lists or list-servs that went to building coordinators and residence halls.

"The e-mail that people are talking about was addressing the rumor control," she said, referring to the list-serv notice at around 4 p.m., after the incident was over.

E-mails were not sent out to the entire UCLA community.

"One thing (we) want to avoid is over-noticing people. Focus groups (formed after the Virginia Tech shooting) have said if they get too much information or bulletins, they stop looking at them," Greenstein said. "When it&#39;s really important, we&#39;re going to tell you."

Chakravarty contacted UCPD and was told there was no shooting and the students were not in danger.

There are 435 students who attend the on-campus elementary school, which is the laboratory school of the UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, according to the school&#39;s Web site.

The school day ends at 2:40 p.m. and students wait to be picked up in the carpool area at 2:45 p.m. The incident was first reported at around 1:30 p.m., according to witnesses, and police re-opened the streets by 3:20 p.m.

She said it was good that officials tried to lower people&#39;s anxiety, but believes she should have been notified immediately, even if her school was not at risk.

"(It&#39;s) important that we be informed so that we can take action if we need to, and we can allay the fears of the parents," she said. "Parents hear things, they get worried, they call us and they expect us to know."

Since the Virginia Tech shooting on April 16, university campuses nationwide have been sensitive to campus safety issues.

Greenstein said Wednesday&#39;s incident was not an issue of public safety and was not similar to the events at Virginia Tech.

But she added that emergency protocols would have been enacted had the situation been similar to the Virginia Tech shooting.

"(They are) totally not comparable situations," she said.

Lokman said there are trained officials and processes in place if there had been a more serious incident.

He said that depending on the situation, university administrators could choose to use one or more different means of mass communication for safety purposes, such as loudspeakers on police cars, and the campus television station on channel 3 and the emergency radio station, 1630 AM.

He said there is also technology in place, created before the Virginia Tech shooting, that would allow the university to instant message the community and override Web sites such as the UCLA home page and MyUCLA.

"That is technology we&#39;re evaluating to add to our mix of options," he said.

Gabe Rose, Undergraduate Students Association Council president-elect, said university administrators should consider alternative methods of communication.

He said since students do not constantly check their e-mails, "(it&#39;s) important to look for other ways to distribute the message. ... E-mail is not effective."

Instead, Rose said student leaders and university officials should rethink the current policies to come up with different ways to reach students in case of emergencies, such as a text-message system.

"It&#39;s important to not get caught up in the status quo, but to be creative and think harder," he said, adding that students should express their concerns and share ideas with student government leaders on how to make the campus safer.

"If you don&#39;t feel safe on campus, that&#39;s a huge problem," he said.

Greenstein said it is important to distinguish between rumors and official university notices but said the incident on Wednesday was relatively minor.

"(There were) very few people who had issues. ... Many people saw it for what it was worth," Greenstein said.

--

Original Source:<a href=http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2007/may/18/scare_response_scrutinized/>The Daily Bruin - May 18, 2007</a>

Edward Truong

2007-07-13

Sara Hood

Saba Riazati <editor@media.ucla.edu>

eng

Administration: Emory to Open Crisis Office

By: Susan McMillan<br />
Issue date: 4/24/07<br />
Section: News


Emory will establish an Office of Critical Event Preparedness and Response to coordinate responses to catastrophic events, University officials announced Thursday. The office, CEPAR, will report directly to University President James W. Wagner.

Although the announcement about CEPAR comes close on the heels of last week&#39;s shooting rampage at Virginia Tech, its director, Alexander Isakov, said the timing is coincidental.

"What brought this to the foreground was the University&#39;s effort in the fall of 2005 to address the challenges of a pandemic strain of influenza," said Isakov, an associate professor of emergency medicine.

The office was recommended by the Avian Influenza Task Force, which evaluated Emory&#39;s ability to respond to a flu pandemic, and it was first officially proposed in January 2006. CEPAR will also work on drawing up plans to deal with natural disasters, campus violence, disease outbreak and other situations.

Isakov will assume his new position on May 1, and funding for the office begins Sept. 1, the start of the University&#39;s fiscal year.

He said the staff of CEPAR will identify current emergency response plans in place across Emory&#39;s divisions and coordinate them to eliminate duplication. By making planning more efficient and cohesive, Isakov said, the University can ensure more effective responses to catastrophic events.

In addition, by bringing together Emory&#39;s emergency planning and response functions, CEPAR will be able to serve as a "central command and control center" in the case of a crisis, Isakov said.

Emory also plans to enhance its emergency notification systems with a handful of new technologies, Emory Police Department Chief Craig Watson said. He said the timing of the announcement of the enhancements is also coincidental, since they emerged as recommendations from a task force last fall.

"We&#39;ve been working on this for quite a while now," Watson said.

One suggestion was a siren and public address system that could be used for inclement weather warnings or voice messages. Another addition would be a computerized paging system that could target key groups, such as building managers, or be used more broadly, like a text-message warning sent to registered cell phones.

Less direct notification systems proposed include banners for Emory&#39;s cable TV system and the creation of an AM radio station that could also provide traffic and campus directions when there is no emergency.

Watson said funding has been secured for these improvements and that they are expected to be in place by the end of 2007, if not sooner.

--

Original Source: <a href=http://media.www.emorywheel.com/media/storage/paper919/news/2007/04/24/News/Administration.Emory.To.Open.Crisis.Office-2876089.shtml> Emory Wheel - April 24, 2007</a>

Susan McMillan

2007-07-11

Sara Hood

"Christopher H. Megerian" <cmegeri@LearnLink.Emory.Edu>

eng

C.U. Officials Discuss Response to Va. Tech

By Ben Eisen
Sun Staff Writer
Apr 25 2007

"Half of college students report having felt extremely depressed," said Ray Kim, assistant dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, to a crowd of students in Goldwin Smith&#39;s Hollis E. Cornell auditorium yesterday afternoon. "60 percent of students report feeling absolutely hopeless at times. 10 percent of students reported seriously considering suicide. How many people knew it was this bad?"

No one raised their hands.

Kim was one of four speakers on a panel yesterday afternoon to speak about the Virginia Tech tragedy and Cornell&#39;s level of preparedness for such emergencies. Hosted by Omega Phi Beta Sorority and Lambda Phi Epsilon, the goal of the discussion was to bring the past week&#39;s events home to our campus.

Other speakers included George Sutfin, head of crime prevention at Cornell Police, Chief Curtis Ostrander who has worked for CUPD since before the 1983 shooting at Cornell, and Dr. Ya-Shu Liang, who works for Counseling and Psychological Services.

"Every time something happens [response and prevention] plans are reevaluated," Sutfin said.

"Columbine got everyone reevaluating response," added Ostrander. "New training was developed. I was one of the first officers who received training."

Sutfin told the audience that Cornell is now in the process of making a contract with a company that alerts everyone on campus of emergencies by text message.

"If something happens at an elementary school, it&#39;s easy to shut down, but Cornell is a small city, and it&#39;s very hard to shut down the entire campus. Studies show that 90 percent of students have cell phones, so [the new plan will] send texts to everyone in a circumference."

Though the officers were unable not comment on their current response plans to the specific type of emergency that happened at Virginia Tech, Sutfin said that CUPD senior staff sat in on meetings to discuss changes to the plans while the panel was going on.

He added that a lot of prevention rests in the hands of students. According to Sutfin, many students let unknown people into their dormitories, putting everyone at risk. He cited an incident when, dressed in jeans and a t-shirt, he was able to get into a dorm, go into an unlocked room and "steal" a computer, without ever being asked who he was.

Kim said that there is added pressure in a university setting, which often drives people to need help. He said that University policy forbids the administration from telling parents when their students show signs of problems unless the student provides consent, and Gannett and Cayuga Medical cannot tell the administration when students need help. This means that a lot of responsibility for reaching out to those in trouble rests in the hands of students.

Liu spoke about the infrastructure that Gannett has implemented to help at-risk students through CAPS.

"If students are in danger to themselves or others, we may break confidentiality," Liu said. "If someone called the hotline and said that they were going to kill people, we would force them into the hospital."

She added that students have also used CAPS to help them cope with the Virginia Tech tragedy.

This panel was the only community forum organized by students, according to Antonia de Jesus &#39;09 of Omega Phi Beta, who helped arrange the event.

"I got a call from my mother crying the day it happened," said de Jesus. "She had seen the pictures of all students. I looked it up on the internet, and I thought that something had to be done, so we put it all together."

Tiffany Brutus &#39;07, president of Omega Phi Beta, was concerned because Cornell students had not done more in response to the tragedy.

"It&#39;s a big reflection on our generation. People care about it in the now, but not a couple days later. If you don&#39;t go to Virginia Tech, people forget about it."

--

Original Source: <a href=http://cornellsun.com/node/23152> Cornell Daily Sun - April 25, 2007</a>

Ben Eisen

2007-07-10

Sara Hood

Jonny Lieberman <jdl46@cornell.edu>, <lieberman.jonny@gmail.com>

eng

&#39;We Are One&#39;: C.U. Community Reflects on Va. Tech Tragedy

By Lisa Grossman
Sun Staff Writer
Apr 20 2007

Students, faculty, staff and members of the Ithaca community gathered in Sage Chapel yesterday afternoon to remember and reflect on the recent tragedy at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Despite the fact that the service was held at 12:30 p.m., when many students and faculty are in class, the chapel was packed to capacity, with people pressed against the walls and in doorways.

The assembly fell silent as Prof. Annette Richards, music, opened the service with a melancholy and discordant organ solo. The mood remained hushed and somber as W. Kent Fuchs, the Joseph Silbert Dean of Engineering and father of Eric Fuchs, a junior at Virginia Tech, began the speaking portion of the service.

Fuchs focused on the connections that Cornell shares with Virginia Tech as a major university, saying that Cornell and Virginia Tech are "part of the same family of students and faculty and staff."

Words of hope.Words of hope."The tragedy is particularly difficult to comprehend because ... of the contrast to the love and care demonstrated by the students and faculty at that university. The tragedy is also an enormous contrast to the common mission that we have and that we share in: the joy of learning and study," he said.

Fuchs spoke with emotion and even a little humor, saying that "from Eric, I&#39;ve come to appreciate what it means to have a turkey for your mascot, and to call yourself a &#39;Hokie,&#39; which my son does with enormous pride."

President David J. Skorton echoed Fuchs&#39; emphasis on family and unity, repeating, in tones that might be used to recite a poem, "We are one."

"We are one — one community, one people, one planet. We are here today to affirm that oneness," he said. "We share the same sorrow and the same need for comfort and reassurance ... We will stay together, we will go forward together, we will never forget our loss. We are one."

Provost Biddy Martin was in Virginia, her native state, visiting her mother on Monday morning. She said she was struck by the "dignity of the students who were approached for interviews by the press - their humility, their respect, their unwillingness to offer superficial commentary, their resistance to easy analysis or the assigning of blame. In response to the questions they were asked, they made a plea ... that we not reduce their experience or their university to this horror, this unspeakable tragedy."

"In response to their plea, it is not hard, I think, for Cornellians to answer, to identify with Virginia Tech," she said.

The service was punctuated by musical performances, including the Cornell University Chorus and Glee Club and a vocal solo by Rev. Heewon Chun, chaplain of the Korean Church at Cornell.

Chun said he found the service "very comforting. It will give Cornellians energy to cope with what has happened, and will also give hope for the future ... one for backwards, one for forwards." He also said that the Korean community deeply aches for this tragedy, and noted that some members of the Korean community are concerned about the possibility of race-related backlash.

Thomas Riehl &#39;09 said he felt "wary of how much race seems to be playing into it. Why was it even pertinent to have [a Korean religious leader] sing? Why is this even part of the issue? It just seems so wrong and out of it to bring up the kid&#39;s race."

Sarah Dunlap &#39;06 was also concerned with the potential effect the incident and the media&#39;s treatment of it could have on the community of international students. She noted that "on CNN, the commentators kept referring to the shooter as an &#39;alien&#39; because he was a foreign student. I was disgusted—that&#39;s demoralizing. It&#39;s offensive to the entire body of foreign students, and on the individual level, that kind of exclusion and alienation is the kind of thing that leads to the desperate misery and rage that makes some people lash out in horrible ways."

Dunlap found comfort in the service itself, however, saying that she "liked the focus on community. The response of the Cornell community is different from the response of the national community. It&#39;s not sensationalist; it&#39;s more nuanced. I think that&#39;s because even if we don&#39;t have a personal connection to Virginia Tech, we still identify strongly with them because we belong to the same university culture."

Some people have questioned why the service was held in the middle of the afternoon, when a large portion of students was in class.

Ken Clarke, director of Cornell United Religious Work, said that the time was chosen in order to "catch the greatest cross-section of the Cornell community." He acknowledged that there was no optimal time to hold the service, and while some students had to miss it due to class obligations, much of the staff and faculty would have missed an evening service because of obligations at home. Clarke also noted that holding the service at 12:30 meant that it would be flanked by the chimes.

The bells of McGraw tower rang 33 times before the service, once for each of the victims, and the daily afternoon chimes concert began just as people began filing out of Sage Chapel.

You can view a recording of the service at www.cornell.edu.


<b>Comments:</b>


Outraged

With all due respect, you write that the "bells of McGraw tower rang 33 times before the service, once for each of the victims..." This is a complete moral outrage -- since when is a cold blooded killer a victim? This is akin to reading the 9/11 hijackers&#39; names along with the true 9/11 victims.

<i>By Alex Hyman (not verified) at April 20, 2007 - 2:10am</i>

----

Appalled

Not only did the bells ring 33 times, but President Skorton was sure to include the killer with the victims. Such a disgrace. What the crap was he thinking?

<i>By Tammi (not verified) at April 20, 2007 - 11:20am</i>

----

A little compassion

The gunman may not have been a victim of a violent murder, but he was certainly a victim. He was a victim of mental illness, of being trapped in his own psyche where every interaction with the world felt like an attack. He&#39;s still another person who could have had a future and didn&#39;t. He had a family, too--how must they be feeling now? Including him and remembering him respectfully now is not only appropriate, it&#39;s too little too late. Maybe if he had felt less isolated before, we wouldn&#39;t need to be discussing it. His situation was tragic, too.

<i>By Hannah (not verified) at April 21, 2007 - 4:50pm</i>

----

This moral equivalence is totally disgraceful


"The bells of McGraw tower rang 33 times before the service, once for each of the victims"

Cho was not a victim; he was a perpetrator who chose to kill 32 students. Forgiveness is good but why are we paying him respect and honor?

We don&#39;t honor, hold services or ring bells for just anyone who commits suicide. The only reason Cho is included is because he massacred 32 defenseless students in cold blood. I agree with Alex Hymen above that this is totally inappropriate and outrageous.

<i>By Coyote (not verified) at April 22, 2007 - 10:04am</i>

----

Hannah, we must reexamine a society that makes everyone out to be a victim. Find me a person who was not made fun of in high school. The fact is everyone was made fun of and 99% don&#39;t go out and kill people. While we can feel bad for Cho&#39;s family, as we currently know of nothing that they did wrong, he is certainly not a victim and certainly should not be memorialized. And as for your comment about him being a victim of mental illness -- I would agree with you, but that&#39;s where him being a victim ends. Since when do we ring bells for victims of mental illness? The fact is he -- like all freely thinking people -- made a choice, but made the wrong choice.

<i>By Alex Hyman (not verified) at April 22, 2007 - 6:12pm</i>

----

Disgusting

Skorton is an educated, articulate, man. He must have realized what his words meant. For him to say that Cornell is "one" with a murderer is beyond the pale.

<i>By G. Man (not verified) at April 23, 2007 - 8:55am</i>

----

People obviously handle grief in different ways

I don&#39;t think memorializing the shooter was the "right" thing to do, and I personally would not do it myself, but I think some people feel the need to memorialize Cho to help them deal with their grief. Although Cho was the perpetrator in this horrible tragedy, he was also a victim of a horrible mental health system in this country. If he had gotten the help he so desperately needed, then possibly this whole thing could have been avoided.

Also think how his family must feel. They are obviously victims also, because they have to live with this horrible tragedy for the rest of their lives, as well as the families of the victims of Cho&#39;s madness.

<i>By Anne (not verified) at April 28, 2007 - 12:02pm</i>

--

Original Source: <a href= http://cornellsun.com/node/23056> Cornell Daily Sun - April 20, 2007</a>

Sara Hood

Cornell Daily Sun

2007-07-02

Sara Hood

Jonny Lieberman <jdl46@cornell.edu>, <lieberman.jonny@gmail.com>

eng

32 killed in Virginia Tech massacre

<i>200 miles away, Duke students hold vigil, admins offer support</i>

By: Anna Lieth
Posted: 4/17/07

After violent shootings shook students and administrators on Virginia Tech&#39;s campus Monday, members of the Duke community gathered last night to mourn and come to terms with the tragic events of the day.

Just 200 miles southeast of Virginia Tech&#39;s home in Blacksburg, Va., Duke students said the news sent a shock wave through the campus. For some, the shock was followed by fear for friends and loved ones in Virginia, but for others fear was displaced by disbelief and worry that a similar event could take place at the campus they call home.

And for one group of students, the natural response to the news was to pray. About 30 students gathered on the steps of the Duke Chapel for an emotional vigil and prayer session for the victims of the shooting, their respective families and the gunman Monday night.

"[The vigil is] not just to console people, but also to know that there is a community that is here to support people and that as a community we need to act together," said sophomore Ashley Dunfee, who attended the event. "We have a root that we act from and that ultimately should be the source of what we do and where we&#39;re going."

President Richard Brodhead, in a statement released to The Chronicle, recognized the magnitude of the events at Virginia Tech and emphasized efforts the University is making to reach out to members of both the Virginia Tech and Duke communities who were affected by the tragedy.

"This is the deadliest campus shooting in United States history and a profoundly sad day for everyone directly affected-and the nation as a whole," Brodhead said. "On behalf of the entire Duke community, I express my condolences to those who are grieving at Virginia Tech. They are enduring a time of unspeakable loss this evening."

John Burness, senior vice president for government affairs and public relations, said Brodhead also reached out following news of the event to Charles Steger, Virginia Tech&#39;s president, to offer his sympathies.

Brodhead said the University is working to provide support for students on Duke&#39;s campus who have been personally affected.

"Student Affairs is in the process of trying to identify every Duke student with Virginia Tech connections and to make personal contact and to offer counseling," he said. "Our Religious Life staff is also available for counseling and the Duke Chapel will be open as always for those who wish to seek a quiet place to reflect."

The Duke Chapel and the Duke Religious Life staff have organized an interfaith prayer vigil to be held on the Chapel steps at 2 p.m. today.

"This vigil is a small gesture at being in solidarity with those in Blacksburg," Craig Kocher, assistant dean of the Chapel and director of religious life, wrote in an e-mail to the student body last night.

Kocher said the vigil will include a time of silence followed by prayer and a bell toll for each person who died yesterday and will conclude with an open session for students to speak about the experience. Virginia Tech will be hosting a similar event on its campus simultaneously, Kocher said.

--

Original Source: <a href=http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2007/04/17/News/32.Killed.In.Virginia.Tech.Massacre-2846222.shtml> Duke Chronicle - April 17, 2007</a>

Anna Lieth

Duke Chronicle

2007-06-24

Sara Hood

David Graham <david.graham@duke.edu>

eng

Editorial: Address campus tragedies

April 27, 2007
By Editorial Board

It is a tough line to walk: simultaneously respecting those affected by tragedy and reassuring the community in a time of crisis. This year has seen numerous examples of the administration&#39;s sincere efforts to negotiate that line with the handful of student suicides and most recently with its response to Stanford students on the Virginia Tech shootings.

But in each of those cases, we wish the administration would have spoken directly to all of us, or in instances in which they did, perhaps spoken sooner. An unknown number of classmates have taken their lives this year with no acknowledgement at all by the administration. Last week, it was more than 24 hours until we received an official response to the Virginia Tech tragedy.

Undoubtedly, many factors go into the process for announcing a death in the community or responding to a tragedy at another school. In phone and email conversations, Director of University Communications Alan Acosta and Vice Provost for Student Affairs Greg Boardman said that the issue of family privacy rights should not be overlooked.

While Acosta acknowledged that "there are a number of things you have to do right away" when dealing with tragedy, we don&#39;t understand entirely how the University&#39;s support network of Counseling and Psychological Services, the Bridge Peer Counseling Center or the Office of Religious Life assists students who are merely trying to determine if the rumor of their classmate&#39;s death is true or not. This year alone, rumors of numerous suicides plagued the student body, and in those times it was hard to find a student who really knew the truth of what was happening at Stanford.

Boardman&#39;s email to the student body the day after the Virginia Tech shooting was appreciated. Students needed to hear his support — we just wish it had come a little earlier. Those who live and work here expect Stanford to be there for them. The student body was never notified after some suicides. We do not expect a front-page story in the Stanford Report from the administration, but we do hope for a brief message to acknowledge a friend has passed away.

<b>Comments on this article:</b>

<b>Stupid editorial</b> - 4/27/07

What exactly is the editorial board asking for? The administration to send out mass e-mails detailing every aspect of a community member&#39;s death? The Stanford News Service already acknowledges (in a tasteful way!) Stanford community members who pass away. Maybe it was a slow news day today, but the Stanford Daily needs to realize that a student death is a rare occurrence, but if one does occur, the utmost sensitivity is required and respect for the families should be a top priority. This is obvious to everyone but those intrepid Daily writers? We need to remember that these are very private, delicate matters and families might not wish to broadcast all kinds of details to the world. That is perfectly understandable and, absent any danger to campus safety or any other issue that might require the immediate attention of the campus at large, there is no reason why the widespread dissemination of all details surrounding a particular death ought to be required for Stanford News Service. The following line from the editorial is particularly ridiculous: "This year alone, rumors of numerous suicides plagued the student body, and in those times it was hard to find a student who really knew the truth of what was happening at Stanford." So the paper is basing this whole editorial on rumors? What evidence does the paper have that a particular death was never acknowledged by the administration? Sometimes it seems like the Stanford Daily editorials are written hastily and with little regard for common sense.

<b>Re: Stupid editorial</b> - 4/27/07

I totally agree that this is a stupid editorial. The Stanford Daily was recently criticized for a long delay before they reported the death of Mo Morsette. And even when they did report it, it was not the top story of the day. It looks like, after some soul searching, the editorial board has decided that Stanford Administration is to blame, because the administration doesn&#39;t acknowledge student deaths quickly enough. After all, if someone doesn&#39;t tell the Stanford Daily that there&#39;s a death on campus, then how are they supposed to know? It&#39;s not like they&#39;re a NEWSPAPER with JOURNALISTS who are supposed to so FOOTWORK before they print stories.

<b>Daily is grasping at straws </b>- 4/27/07

The Daily&#39;s editorials have been going downhill for quite a while now. This one is perhaps one of their worst ever. What exactly is the benefit of criticizing the administration&#39;s response to the VT massacre?

<b>Brave Editorial</b> - 4/27/07

Stupid Editorial, it&#39;s your kind of overly sensitive, well-meaning but ultimately silly thinking that lets Bush get away with banning the media from soldier&#39;s funerals. I can understand respecting the family&#39;s privacy, but Mo Morsette was also a fellow member of this community - I would expect a complete investigation into what led him to take his own life, not in the interest of airing dirty laundry, but in the interest of helping other people who feel the same emotions that plagued him. This school is an intense psychological environment filled people whose incredible intelligence often dovetails with complete social maladjustment - it does not reflect well on Stanford to sweep things like this under the rug in the interest of "privacy."

--

Original Source: <a href="http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2007/4/27/editorialAddressCampusTragedies">
Stanford Daily - April 27, 2007</a>

Editorial Board

Stanford Daily

2007-06-13

Sara Hood

Permissions granted by
James Hohmann
Editor-in-Chief
The Stanford Daily
<jhohmann@stanford.edu>

eng

Va. shooting prompts Univ. policy review

<b> Police trained, armed with special weapons, for crisis </b>

April 20, 2007
By Rahul Kanakia

A new Stanford committee will conduct an evaluation of its emergency protocols in the wake of Monday&#39;s shootings at Virginia Tech University. The protocol review, which will be led by Vice President for Business Affairs Randy Livingston, was announced in a statement concerning the massacre by President John Hennessy.

A University Department of Public Safety community service officer records the SLAC protest with a video camera and carries a camera with a telephoto lens to photograph activists.

"The terrible ordeal suffered there reminds us how precious life is and how important it is that we all redouble our efforts to prevent such tragedies in the future," Hennessy said. "At Stanford, we plan to review all of our emergency response protocols. The safety of the Stanford community will always be a top priority for us."

Police at Virginia Tech have drawn criticism for their decision not to lock down the campus after the initial shootings in West Ambler Johnson Hall, a dormitory.

Chris Cohendet, a deputy at the Department of Public Safety (DPS), said the police train for what he called "an active shooter situation." In such a case, officers would call together nearby agencies and attempt to control the situation.

"There&#39;s obviously a lot of things that go through your mind," he said. "You want to be sure the community is safe. But you&#39;ve got to figure things out. For instance, at [Virginia Tech, officers] received what they thought was a domestic dispute call earlier on. And within that time frame the police department [was] getting numerous calls with differing information. It&#39;s really hard for a police department to filter all of this information."

For these kinds of situations, Stanford&#39;s police cruisers carry a variety of weapons in addition to the standard issue handguns. They are also equipped with non-lethal weapons, such as tasers, as well as more powerful alternatives, including shotguns.

"Basically, if there&#39;s something going on where someone is going through buildings and shooting away, law enforcement has to grab teams together and react," Cohendet said. "We would have to engage the suspect, in this case."

Greg Boardman, vice provost for student affairs, said the University would take Monday&#39;s incident into account while reviewing its policies for students with mental health issues. The Virginia Tech shooter, Cho Seung-Hui, had previously been committed to a psychiatric facility by the Blacksburg, Va. university but was released when two female students he had harassed decided not to press charges against him.

"In recognition of the increasing prevalence and complexity of student mental health issues both nationally and here at Stanford, we have been in the process of studying the University&#39;s policies and procedures as well as our campus climate through the work of the Mental Health and Well Being Task Force," he wrote in an email to The Daily. "Created in October 2006, the task force is composed of students, staff and faculty, and it has been meeting regularly since the fall in order to assess our current policies and determine where we can make improvements."

Associate Vice Provost for Student Affairs Roger Printup was unsure what changes would come from these initiatives.

"I am sure that not only Stanford but every college and university will be considering what this event means for a large number of issues," he wrote in an email to The Daily. "Campus security and mental health [are] the two most obvious issues. But it is way too early to speculate on what specific actions might be taken before institutions have an opportunity to examine those issues thoughtfully and in depth."

Betts Gorsky, who was on campus for Admit Weekend and whose daughter will attend Stanford next year, said that the shootings did not change her view of campus security.

"I think that it&#39;s very difficult for any school to protect against random acts of violence like that," she said. "Maybe it will make individuals a little more observant and willing to react if they see or hear something from a student that seems out of the ordinary or depressed. But it&#39;s always easy to have 20/20 hindsight."

--

Original Source: <a href="http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2007/4/20/vaShootingPromptsUnivPolicyReview"> Stanford Daily, April 20, 2007 </a>

Rahul Kanakia

2007-06-13

Sara Hood

Permissions granted by
James Hohmann
Editor-in-Chief
The Stanford Daily
<jhohmann@stanford.edu>

eng

Stage weapons ban reversed

Published: Wednesday, April 25, 2007


Tyler Hill
Staff Reporter

After a weekend of national media coverage and student outcry, administrators decided Monday to rescind the ban on stage weapons that was enacted in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre.

Last week, Dean of Student Affairs Betty Trachtenberg told several students that realistic-looking stage weapons would no longer be permitted in Yale theatrical productions. Amid concerns that the restriction was inhibiting free speech, a group of administrators decided Monday to overturn the policy, Yale spokeswoman Helaine Klasky said. In the future, Yale will require that audiences be warned before performances that include scenes with fake weapons, she said.

Trachtenberg had originally intended to ban all stage weapons, but was persuaded that obviously fake weapons should be permitted, Sarah Holdren &#39;08 told the News last Thursday. Holdren directed this weekend&#39;s production of "Red Noses," which was forced to use wooden swords instead of more realistic props. The restriction also affected the opera "Orpheus in the Underworld," which used balloon swords in place of its real-looking stage weapons.

News of the University&#39;s reversal was only released when a reporter from the Associated Press called Klasky on Monday evening to ask about the original restriction. Students have not yet been officially informed of the change in policy, Klasky said.

Administrators, including Yale President Richard Levin, weighed in on the decision to overturn the ban after it became apparent that it concerned issues of free speech, Levin said. Although the administration will not censor future shows, he said, the Dean of Student Affairs still has the authority to regulate student productions.

"The fundamental consideration was trading off artistic freedom of expression against concern about the potential emotional precariousness of audiences during the week of a mass murder," he said. "There was a different approach which hadn&#39;t been considered at the time, and the approach would be not to censor the show but warn the audience."

But Holdren said she asked Trachtenberg on Thursday to consider allowing the use of realistic-looking weapons if the staff included a warning before each show. At the time, Trachtenberg found that alternative unacceptable, Holdren said. She said that although the change comes too late to affect her show, which ended its run on Saturday, she is glad the administration has considered the issue more carefully.

"Obviously professional theater companies do shows with weapons all of the time and it&#39;s up to the audience&#39;s discretion whether or not to watch," she said.

Trachtenberg declined to comment Tuesday night about the reversal of her decision, but over the weekend she told the News that student criticism of the stage weapons ban had been exaggerated.

"I think people should start thinking about other people rather than trying to feel sorry for themselves and thinking that the administration is trying to thwart their creativity," Trachtenberg said. "They&#39;re not using their own intelligence. ... We have to think of the people who might be affected by seeing real-life weapons."

Dustin Cho &#39;08, chair of the Yale chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said "knee jerk" reactions are common after national tragedies, but that such limitations on free speech inhibit any meaningful dialogue. Generally Yale is very good at protecting free speech, he said.

"It&#39;s quite a stretch to say that substituting realistic-looking prop swords with wooden ones showed more sensitivity to the shooting victims," he said. "This was a grave mistake, but I&#39;m glad they took care of it immediately."

Trachtenberg, who has served as Dean of Student Affairs for 20 years, announced in November that she is stepping down at the end of the academic year.

--

Original Source: <a href="http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/20927"> Yale Daily News - April 25, 2007 </a>

Sara Hood

2007-06-11

Sara Hood

Editor-in-Chief, Yale Daily News - Sarah Mishkin <sarah.mishkin@gmail.com>

eng

Elis decry ban on stage weapon use

Published: Monday, April 23, 2007


Cullen Macbeth
Staff Reporter

Members of Yale&#39;s undergraduate theater community reacted with anger over the weekend to Dean of Student Affairs Betty Trachtenberg&#39;s decision to bar performance groups — at least temporarily — from using life-like weapons in their productions.

The new rule is meant to protect audience members who may have connections to last week&#39;s deadly gun massacre at Virginia Tech University or who may react adversely to violence on stage because of personal experiences, Trachtenberg said. But many students said the new restrictions represent inappropriate censorship of student artwork and that Trachtenberg should not have implemented them without soliciting student input beforehand.

The new restrictions were put in place to protect people in the Yale and New Haven communities who live or have friends who live in Virginia, or who have seen people die by gun violence, Trachtenberg said. She said the outcry from students upset with her decision has been exaggerated.

"I think people should start thinking about other people rather than trying to feel sorry for themselves and thinking that the administration is trying to thwart their creativity," Trachtenberg said. "They&#39;re not using their own intelligence. ... We have to think of the people who might be affected by seeing real-life weapons."

The new restrictions do not ban all types of stage weapons, Trachtenberg said. She said she did not prevent an instructor in theater studies who talked to her on Friday from using a dulled knife to cut a cabbage head in a production, for example.

This weekend&#39;s productions of "Red Noses" and "Orpheus in the Underworld" were affected by the rule change. "Red Noses" had to substitute wooden swords for more realistic-looking ones after learning of the rule from Trachtenberg on Thursday.

The University overstepped its bounds by prohibiting the ways in which students can express themselves on stage, said Dara Lind &#39;09, who has managed and produced several campus performances.

"Personally, I am very strongly anti-censorship as far as the arts are concerned," she said. "I don&#39;t understand what gives the college the right to try to circumscribe artistic expression like that."

Lind is a staff columnist for the News.

Students should be left to decide for themselves what is appropriate to include in their productions and should be able to use theater to realistically portray a range of topics, including those relating to gun violence, Yale Drama Coalition Vice President Mike Leibenluft &#39;10 said. While he was in high school, Leibenluft said, he worked on a show about the Columbine High School shootings that documented witnesses&#39; reactions to the violence.

"I think the fact that it assumes that we first of all can&#39;t deal with these issues in a dramatic setting and also we can&#39;t take responsibility for the theater that is produced and the reaction it has from Yale students is pretty shocking," he said. "I was incredibly surprised by it. I think it&#39;s totally inappropriate."

Leibenluft said Trachtenberg should have consulted with students before implementing the new regulation.

But Yale Dramatic Association President Emmett Zackheim &#39;08 said he is not concerned by the ban because he thinks the normal rules governing the use of weapons in theatrical productions will be reinstated before long.

"I don&#39;t think it&#39;s a disaster for everyone involved in theater," he said. "It essentially doesn&#39;t concern me. I probably wouldn&#39;t have done the same thing necessarily, but I&#39;m not really concerned by it."

Trachtenberg has not yet decided whether the new restrictions will be in place permanently and will review the decision as "things settle down," she said. She said she consulted with representatives from the Theater Studies Program and did not make a "unilateral decision" about the rule.

Lind and several other students formed a "FEAR NO ART" Facebook group over the weekend to protest Trachtenberg&#39;s decision and discussed ways to try to get the rule reversed. The groups have not yet decided on a definite plan, she said, but they may stage a rally on Beinecke Plaza or attempt to set up a meeting with Trachtenberg to discuss the rule.

"As far as collaboration is concerned, it will probably just be easiest to take public action," Lind said. "The best way to prove that art gives much more to the student body than it takes away is to have public art and demonstrate to people what the benefit is of having unrestricted artistic expression."

The continuation of the new restrictions could hamper the theater community&#39;s willingness and ability to put on a wide variety of shows, YDC founder Eyad Houssami &#39;07 said. He said he would have "strong reservations" about agreeing to produce a show that requires stage weapons — such as the one he put on for his senior project, which required a shotgun — if the ban on realistic props remains in place.

"When you&#39;re using realistic props, it doesn&#39;t make sense to substitute them with children&#39;s toys, because you are making a mockery of the play and of the character," Houssami said. "I feel like by banning weapons from the stage at Yale, we are kind of silencing a potentially fruitful debate on violence and the nature of violence in America today."

The University had rules in place before last week that limited the kinds of weapons students could use in productions, Trachtenberg said, but she does not know the exact provisions.

--

Original Source: <a href="http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/20886"> Yale Daily News - April 23, 2007 </a>

Sara Hood

2007-06-11

Sara Hood

Editor-in-Chief, Yale Daily News - Sarah Mishkin <sarah.mishkin@gmail.com>

eng