WIDB History Chapter 21

Baptism by Fire

   The priority on music programming led to little attention being paid to the development of a News Department before WIDB's sign on. While "jocks" were selected only after a rigorous audition and training process, news people were just auditioned and not trained. Where there was an extensive program format on paper, almost nothing was codified for news. There was no equipment or production studio for news people to use, and no real leader of the news department. While Tony Noce was named the first News director, he graduated in 1969. When Nick Cipriani had agreed to replace Tony as news director, it was with the understanding that Nick's time at the station would be limited.
   In the first days of WIDB after sign on, news was called for by the format for five minutes each hour. Often no one would show up to do news. When this happened, the "jock" was supposed to do it himself. Generally this ranged from a disaster to a joke. The jock was not trained for news and usually did not have the skill to do it. The jock usually had his hands full trying to be a jock (remember, it WAS the first few days and many jocks had little experience); and the jock had little time to prepare for news. Stories were often read out of newspapers or stale UPI copy from somewhere else was read cold. The result was that news was embarrassing, and most staff members cringed when it was news time.

   Except for the preoccupation with establishing the station through music programming, it seems unusual in hindsight that news was not an early priority. While there have always been segments of WIDB's target audience uninterested in news and information programming, 1970 might have been a peak year for student interest in news. There was an extremely high interest by SIU students in world and national affairs in 1970. Students' lives, and those of their friends, were directly impacted by the draft, draft lottery, and the war. Even as one chose to distance oneself from these ongoing events, it became increasingly difficult. These events were often lead stories on newscasts, and on the front page of newspapers. A number of one's friends, classmates, acquaintances, even parents and professors might discuss these things every day.

   This general arousal spread to other areas, such as environmental concerns. April, 1970 marked the first Earth Day. Based on a review of the Southern Illinoisians, Daily Egyptians, and other sources such as H. P. Kloplowicz's book Carbondale After Dark, there were a number of activities, events, and student groups centered around discussion or protest of the war, draft, foreign policy, government abuses, changing the system. SIU Student Government funded Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and the Southern Illinois Peace Committee. Student Government itself had been active, aggressive, and relatively powerful. It demanded, and received, some expanded student rights from the administration. One was elimination of "women's hours" in dorms. (Until then all women had to be in dorms after dark so they could be locked away from the temptations of the world). In January, 1970, Student Government brought Abbie Hoffman to speak on the war.

   The University had received a federal grant to establish a "Vietnamese Studies Center." The ostensible purpose was to educate personnel in techniques useful for advancing American interests in vietnam. Rumors abounded that these centered around techniques of torture, intimidation, and propaganda. Why was the University supporting this? The University also maintained an ROTC program at Wheeler Hall. This unquestioningly was to recruit students to participate in furthering the American military's goals. Many students, professors, and other citizens opposed these goals. They questioned why the University was choosing to support activities regarded as immoral and harmful.

   Because of the draft, those of student age were most directly affected by the war. Yet, for many reasons, the opposition to the war cut across many social and economic stratas. There was a great sense of moral outrage that bound religious groups with housewives, and Black Panthers and intellectuals, such as professors. Conservatives also opposed the war because they favored an all out effort to win, or nothing. Vietnam veterans against the war staged a memorable demonstration on the lawn of the White House, where they flung the medals they were awarded for "valor" in Vietnam at the White House in disgust.

   Depending on your poll of choice, by 1970, at least half the country opposed the war, for various reasons. It was painfully obvious that the opposition was far more broad based than a mere isolated student lunatic fringe. The war had split the country, right down the middle. Attitudes began to emerge that those who did not actively oppose the war were supporters, and the only way to stop the war was to disable, or reorient supporting institutions such as the University. For example, if the University was forced to withdraw from the ROTC and Vietnamese Studies Center, it was thought that this would hasten the end of the war. More and more, there was an attitude that each person had a duty to stand up for what he or she believed.

   Naturally, the University administration was slow to respond. There were significant financial consequences for withdrawing in mid-fiscal year from a grant program such as the Vietnamese Studies Center. Many administrators looked upon ROTC as a tradition of college life, hardly subject to arbitrary cancellation upon a few student's whims. There were also some background considerations. Every year, the University had to get its budget approved by the legislature in Springfield. Many legislators were veterans. The legislature was more conservative than student interests. Legislators were far from being able to directly observe events at the front of opinion. Many agreed with the opinion that the antiwar movement was exaggerated, and punishing a few misbehaving students and a few others would solve the problem. The point is that the legislature's general attitude was that the university should punish, not compromise with, protesting students. If University administrators were perceived as "weak" by working with student leaders, then the legislators might be displeased, and seek removal of the administrators along with reduction ofthe University's budget and power. The battle lines had been drawn and WIDB, the new WIDB, would be at the focal point.

end of Chapter 21