I don't understand why editors at college newspapers are responsible for advertisements in the first place, but they should take this opportunity to expand the debate, not to limit it.
Before Horowitz placed his ads, the reparations discussion was pretty much limited to the "usual suspects." At least Horowitz has gotten the subject covered in the New York Times and the Washington Post, although I'm not sure progressives were as prepared to take advantage of this opportunity as Horowitz obviously was. (For one thing, he is an experienced hustler up against a bunch of naive student journalists. He picks his opponents well.)
-- Jim Cullen
Chris Kromm wrote:
>I haven't read all the messages in this thread, but I will argue this: the
>Horowitz ad is a net gain for progressives. While he is being rightly
>tarnished as a wacky fanatic, his ads have brought reparations into the
>public debate far more effectively than rep. proponents have been able to
>do. Many are learning about the issue of reparations for the first time. As
>one of the students involved in protests at Duke remarked to me, "We didn't
>know about the reparations issue until this ad. Now we're on board." Forums
>are being organized on the issue, all of which will be much better attended
>than they would have been pre-Horowitz. All in all, an advance for the
>movement (whether you agree with the reparations case or not).
>CK
>