Universities are supposed to be the bastions of free, even if heated, academic discourse. Questions of agri-business practices against the environment should not be squelched, nor even hindered. An open opportunity for rebuttal is available, once something to rebut has seen legitimate broadcasting. That was forestalled. It is out of line what happened.
It is so unacceptable that a top level decision-making head should roll on this one.
Factually, Strib reports online, this link, as the source of this opening and near to ending wrap-up excerpting:
Move to cancel U film's airing draws backlash - documentary on farming and river pollution was criticized as unfair, but backers disagree.
By TOM MEERSMAN, Star Tribune Sept. 20, 2010 - 9:22 PM
The executive producer of a documentary about farming, pollution and the Mississippi River said Monday that the University of Minnesota made a rash mistake in canceling its broadcast on public television.
Barbara Coffin, head of the film unit at the U's Bell Museum of Natural History, spoke for the first time about what she called "our messy internal confusion."
"Unfortunately, an impulsive late-hour decision to pull the film from broadcast was made without wide internal discussion," she said.
The documentary, "Troubled Waters: A Mississippi River Story," was scheduled for broadcast Oct. 5 on Twin Cities public television.
University vice president of relations Karen Himle canceled the airing two weeks ago without informing any of its nonprofit and public funders beforehand. The McKnight Foundation, the Mississippi River Fund and the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR), which together spent $500,000 on the film, said Monday that they still have not received any explanation for the decision.
Through a spokesman, Himle has said she decided to cancel the broadcast after hearing faculty and administrative concerns that the film was not fair and balanced in how it portrayed conventional farming as one of the main causes of river pollution as far south as the Gulf of Mexico. The U has not explained who voiced the concerns or when.
[...] Wolter and other U officials have provided varied reasons for the cancellation. One was that the film may not have been "factually accurate, objective and balanced in its presentation." Another was that it may not have met the specifications of the legislative appropriation that helped to fund it. [...]
What a crock. (There's more to the article, have a look, give it a "smell test" reading.)
Karen Himle and crew, let's hear a regret-confessional sing along with Paul Robeson:
Ol' man river,
Dat ol' man river
He mus'know sumpin'
But don't say nuthin',
He jes'keeps rollin'
He keeps on rollin' along.
He don' plant taters,
He don't plant cotton,
An' dem dat plants'em
is soon forgotten,
[...]
Soon forgotten. Indeed. Whisked away from public scrutiny before anyone's even had a chance for seeing the argument that some prevalent agri-practices may be very problematic, an argument that once made can be "soon forgotten." The river "don't say nuthin'" so someone else has spoken on its behalf, to at least be heard, even if ignored and forgotten by the public.
"Never allowed to be duly postulated in a public forum and analyzed" is worse than "soon forgotten."
It is worth thinking, "dem dat plants 'em" might just be more inclined to follow Monsanto and Cargill yield maximization and labor minimization industrialized farming norms, than being attentive to social costs that just quietly go down river without due notice, and hence, without such venture costs being made a part of the venturing, etc., and all that.
It's a proper topic for debate and opinion. But not a proper item for censorship by senior nanny-people in a premier world-class university setting.
Suppressed, hidden from sunshine, however you say it, "censorship sucks."
There is no excuse for killing such a showing at the state's leading center of learning and unimpeded thought; and, as said before, a senior head should roll over this situation. It is very, very, very shameful. It requires corrective steps that are firm and definitive. Anything less is a whitewash.
____________UPDATE_____________
Bruininks likes whitewash? He's backed Himle, with a statement from overseas, but it might just be a wait-and-see thing. Strib's latest, excerpted:
University of Minnesota vice president Karen Himle is under fire for canceling the broadcast of a university-produced documentary about farming, pollution and the Mississippi River.
The Land Stewardship Project has called for Himle's resignation, and questioned whether she may have a conflict of interest in the dispute.
Himle is married to John Himle, CEO of Himle Horner Inc., a public relations firm that represents the Minnesota Agri-Growth Council, a trade association that lobbies for agribusiness.
University President Robert Bruininks is in Morocco, where he issued a statement supporting Karen Himle.
"I have every confidence in Vice President Himle and her integrity," Bruininks said, adding that she "continues to be an outstanding part of my leadership team."
Himle decided to pull the film, "Troubled Waters: A Mississippi River Story," after previewing the program on Labor Day weekend. On Sept. 7 she called Twin Cities Public Television to cancel the Oct. 5 broadcast.
Through university spokesman Daniel Wolter, Himle said she made the decision after hearing concerns from faculty members. But Himle told the University of Minnesota Daily newspaper that she initiated the action by calling Allen Levine on Labor Day to discuss her own concerns.
Levine is dean of the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resources Sciences. He oversees the Bell Museum of Natural History, which produced the film. Levine has not been available for interviews for two days.
Himle has not responded to interview requests since last Friday.
Wolter has issued statements attributed to Himle, which first said that the film was not fair and balanced, and then that it may not have met the goals of legislative funders.
Wolter seems to have chosen to dig the hole deeper.
He, Himle, were appointed as Michele Bachmann was, called, to determine such things as what a majority of the legislature thought in a funding bill that like all funding bills had everything for everybody and was passed in the wee hours at the very end of session?
Get real. BS I'd say, is part of the pollution puzzle for dat ol' man river.
Probably the U is best served in this thing if two heads roll. Himle and Wolter seem intent in dissembling, and are not doing a credible or convincing job of it. If dissembling is part of the job description, go figure job performance.
However, I doubt "dissembler" and "censor" were listed in the recruitment and search list of character requirements for either of the hirings.
The role of the Horner firm in things only muddies the water - today's ongoing metaphor for the issue.
-------------
My bet, Himle's remaining time on the job is short; the documentary gets broadcasting and will have a greater viewership by virtue of the Himle bass-akward "promotion" of its virtues and value. Wolter keeps his job, why, I cannot say but that's my guesswork of the ending status of things a month to a month and a half from now. Things like this happen only because the wrong people get appointed to the wrong jobs, and lack even the limited judgment needed to not misstep badly.
____________FURTHER UPDATE____________
Any connection, this link?
____________Further Links-All from MPR_____________
MPR coverage of the general news story: This link.
Commentary from the producer/director of the film: This link.
Earlier story the day after the first news of the cancelling of the film: This link.
An earlier article, after a viewing of the film: This link.