January 12, 1916

To the Student Body

The Nebraskan originally started as a private enterprise. The editors reporters business managers were employees of a corporation and the paper was managed along the usual journalistic lines. This arrangement ultimately became unsatisfactory to the Regents and the University purchased the stock of the company.

The Ownership of the Paper is now vested in the Regents but it is and always has been their wish that the students have a reasonably free hand in its management. They desire not only that it reflect student life accurately but also that the students who manage it receive training in journalism.

The University is not only the sole owner of the paper but also its best subscriber. A very considerable per cent of the revenues of the paper come from the subscriptions paid by the Regents for copies sent to the high schools of the state.

When the Regents took over the paper they delegated to a mixed board of faculty and students full power to manage its affairs. Of course delegated powers cannot be re-delegated and so it is not within the authority of this board to delegate to the subscribers the election of editors and managers. The

Publication board can however take a straw ballot on the wishes of the subscribers and act on the result if it sees fit. For a number of years this interesting experiment has been tried out in the selection of the Nebraskan staff and we are now in a position to sum up the results. The results have on the whole been less satisfactory than the old method. The naming of a staff is a matter requiring expert knowledge. Many of the subscribers do not have this expert knowledge and are sometimes unduly influenced by acquaintance social connections good fellowship and other factors. This is said with no reflection on many of the excellent members of the staff who have been appointed by the board on the strength of the "election".

At the present time information has come to my office which makes me feel that the best interests of the University will be served by the board's proceeding to appoint the Nebraskan staff without holding the customary "election". In so far as I am concerned there are no personalities involved in the case. It is all a part of the old question as to whether "elections" or appointments produce the best results. Under the present conditions the latter seem preferable. The board is fully at liberty to return to the old system if after a fair comparison of results the resumption of appointments without "elections" does not give satisfactory results to the subscribers of the paper.

S. Avery