{"id":904,"date":"2019-12-12T19:15:06","date_gmt":"2019-12-12T19:15:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ascblogs.lib.purdue.edu\/fall2019-honors49900\/?p=904"},"modified":"2020-01-27T18:08:30","modified_gmt":"2020-01-27T18:08:30","slug":"all-power-and-paper-to-the-people","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ascblogs.lib.purdue.edu\/fall2019-honors49900\/2019\/12\/12\/all-power-and-paper-to-the-people\/","title":{"rendered":"All Power (and Paper) to the People"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

by Alex Griffin-Little<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The 1960s were obviously a time of great political and social change in America. Many of these changes emanated from college campuses across the country, and even Purdue University got a piece of the action. One of the ways in which radical and leftist ideas were disseminated to the public was through underground newspapers. Underground newspapers were independent and obviously had more control over the content they created as opposed to more mainstream and privately-owned newspapers. As a result, the stories that underground newspapers reported on could be more taboo and politically charged. However, underground newspapers were not only radical in the nature of the content they reported on but also in who was doing the reporting. Underground newspapers began popping up around the 1960s and 1970s due to the growth in popularity of social movements and the lack of coverage of these social movements in mainstream newspapers. These underground newspapers were free from the restraints of modesty and cordiality their mainstream counterparts were subject to and could thus report on controversial and radical topics. These underground newspapers, reflecting their diverse audience, had more diverse staff writers and contributors than mainstream newspapers.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

Background and history<\/b><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0John McMillian in \u201cSmoking Typewriters: The Sixties Underground Press and the Rise of Alternative Media in America\u201d discussed how underground newspapers were able to grow so quickly and explained why they were popular in the first place. He stated that one major difference between underground and mainstream reporters is that underground reporters participated in the events that they covered. Thus, underground reporters were able to bring a unique perspective and as a result were more passionate about and close to the stories they covered. These reporters didn\u2019t pretend to be objective and instead wrote opinionated pieces that were relevant to their experiences as a student. This is in direct opposition to the \u201cprefabricated template\u201d mainstream journalists used to cover youth culture. [1] These templates were boring and unappealing to the growing radical left, ultimately pushing them to create the type of content they wanted to read.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Another difference laid within the inherent purpose of the newspaper. \u201cBeginning in the mid-1960s, in cities and campuses across the country, New Leftists began creating and distributing their own radical community newssheets, with which they aimed to promote avant- garde sensibilities and inspire political tumult\u201d.[2] As McMillian noted, these underground papers sought to do more than inform, but to promote their agenda and inspire their readers to join the revolution. McMillian also noted that \u201cmost of these publications centered around the principles concerning racism, the Vietnam War and democratic accountability.\u201d[3]\u00a0 These were issues that reporters wanted to cover and readers want to consume. These were also issues mainstream newspapers did not talk about. Racism and the Vietnam War were the two greatest issues discussed in Purdue underground newspapers.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Lastly, McMillian contributed the success of underground newspapers to their ability to foster a sense of community. He states \u201ccommunity building played a crucial role in helping youths to break away from the complacency and resignation that prevailed in postwar America, in order to build an indigenous, highly stylized protest culture.\u201d[4] In other words, underground publications were produced by peers who were known and lived within the community they were reporting about. This personal connection made viewers more inclined to consume content because it made them feel more informed about and involved within their community. McMillian also noted that the number of underground newspapers grew very quickly. He states, \u201cin 1965, the New Left could claim only five such newspapers, mostly in large cities; within a few years, several hundred papers were in circulation, with a combined readership that stretched into the millions.\u201d[5]<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0But what led to this quick popularity change? Donna Lloyd Ellis states that the success of underground newspapers can be attributed to three main factors. The first was the emergence of a \u201cyouth culture\u201d which emphasized drugs and a \u201cdisenchantment with the American political system.\u201d[6] Also, a large amount of the readers- mainly college students- had the disposable income to purchase the newspapers and the leisure time to read them.[7] It is also noteworthy that the writers, contributors, illustrators, editors, etc. were also college students who had the time to produce these underground newspapers because they did not work full time and most did not have a family.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The second factor that contributed to the success of underground newspapers was the failure of daily newspapers to cover the news young people wanted to actually read.[8] Young people were not interested in fluff pieces or pro-war propaganda. Instead, they wanted to read about the issues that would actually impact them, such as racism, sexism, and the Vietnam War. It is plausible to assume that readers were also upset with the lack of representation in those who were writing the stories, ultimately pushing them to be their own representation.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The third reason underground newspapers became popular very quickly was quite simply because of the comparatively low overhead of new journalistic technology.[9] McMillian concurs with this statement, stating, \u201cbefore the 1960s, newspapers had to be set on a Linotype machine- a procedure that was both costly and difficult. But with the advent of photo offset printing\u2026 one could print several thousand copies of eight or sixteen-page tabloids for just a couple hundred dollars.\u201d[10] This low cost of investment made it possible for college students without a ton of disposable income to front the cost of the first edition and then be able to sell the copies and breakeven or even make a profit. However, 72% of the underground papers queried by UPS claimed they made no profit.[11] The fact that most undergrounds did not seek to make a large profit is another big difference between mainstream newspapers. Papers like the <\/span>Journal & Courier<\/span><\/i> had one ultimate goal: to make money. Since underground newspapers were not as worried about profit, they did not need to appease advertisement companies and could instead create controversial content that their readers wanted to consume.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The low cost of production also allowed for the copies to be sold at a low rate that poor college kids could afford. <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> sold for about 25 cents each, which was affordable enough to purchase every other week or so and was actually competitive with the price of mainstream newspapers. The New York Times cost around 15 cents per copy in 1969. With the emergence of a tangible youth culture, the ability of college students to both read and produce content because of their leisure time, the low cost to produce newspapers, and mainstream papers failing their younger audience, the underground press syndicate had nearly everything stacked in their favor.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

Bauls<\/i><\/b><\/p>

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0One of the biggest underground newspapers on Purdue\u2019s campus in the late 1960s was <\/span>Bauls. Bauls<\/span><\/i> means \u201cwild or mad\u201d in Hindu, which is an accurate description when considering the type of material they were putting out. At least five issues were created during 1969, with the first issue being sold on January 6, 1969. Originally, the Peace Union, a student organization on campus, sold copies of <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> inside the Union. However, the University responded to the sale of the very first edition by preventing the open sale of it on campus the day after it came out. When questions about who was producing this paper began to be asked, the president of the Peace Union, Clark Shimatsu, said the club had \u201cno official connection with the publication\u201d as quoted in an article written in the Journal and Courier.[12] The Peace Union and the <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> publication team responded to this censure by selling copies in secret, which most likely had an ultimate effect of drawing attention to the newspaper and then encouraging students to buy and read it just to see what was so bawdy about it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
The \u201cobscene\u201d photo that resulted in the banning of Bauls from campus [13]<\/figcaption>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

     Volume I, Number II came out on February 3, 1969 and detailed the censure controversy. It also contained quite strong language about Purdue administration, stating \u201cthe administration first broke the rules, not the Peace Union and not <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i>. At this point, it was apparent that the administration could not even be relied upon to keep its own rules, but would instead violate them to prevent distribution by <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i>.\u201d[14] The rules the writer was alluding to was the previously agreed upon sentiment between <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> and Purdue which stated that <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> could sell their paper out in the open if no \u201cindecency\u201d was visible. <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> argued that since they kept up their end of the bargain (ensuring that no nudity was being publicly displayed), they should be allowed to continue the sell of their newspaper. <\/span><\/p>\n

     Purdue administration, however, had a different story. Two days after the banning of <\/span>Bauls, The Exponent<\/span><\/i> ran a story detailing the timeline of the censure, of which included a quote from the Assistant Dean of Men James H. Scott. Scott stated that the paper was banned for \u201cspecific words and the portrayal of a nude man and women\u201d in the paper.[15] Scott went on to state that the Dean\u2019s Office \u201cdoes not consider the publication an appropriate kind of literature accepted among men or women in our academic community to express and convey ideas.\u201d[16] There was no mention of the alleged agreement <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> had with the administration, nor a description as to how long the paper would be banned from campus. <\/span><\/p>\n

     However, the Board of Trustees had a bit of a different take than the Dean\u2019s Office. The January 14 Board of Trustees minutes described the content Bauls created and a brief description of the censure timeline, but then they get into the legal jurisdiction of the administration. For example, one trustee suggested that \u201cthe administration and Trustees must look closer to see what authority actually rests with them\u201d and that there is \u201cno legal issue is involved in sale of the underground paper; defiance of the administration is not a legal issue. The paper is not a student organization publication so there is no legal exposure.\u201d[17] The question of legal jurisdiction over what they could do with \u201cobscene\u201d underground newspapers was a question that plagued both the Board of Trustees and Purdue administration for years and it was never quite answered. When asked the question of what to do immediately, one Trustee suggested that \u201cthe present posture of the Trustees and the administration should be to withhold any action until the appropriate University Senate committees have investigated and reported. Members of the faculty feel that the issue concerning the Exponent and the underground publication is the issue of freedom of the press, not the issue of violation of University regulations.\u201d[18] In other words, the administration should hold off on permanently banning Bauls from campus until they are sure they are in the legal clear. However, this did not come out of the kindness of the Board\u2019s heart. From the little they talked about the underground newspaper scene and student activism in general, the Board appeared to be covering all of their legal bases. They, nor the administration, were not friends of the underground newspaper. <\/span><\/p>\n

     But why was Purdue so harsh on underground newspapers and what were they really scared of? Purdue\u2019s argument that it was all about nudity and obscenity does not really hold up when taking into account how Purdue responded even after <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> stopped selling copies in public. Administration banned the selling of all editions of <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i>, threatened to suspend anyone caught selling the paper, and encouraged West Lafayette to pass an ordinance requiring all sellers of any paper to register with the police department. There were even instances of police officers setting up stings against <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> editors. These actions point to a larger fear- a fear of administration losing control over the education and mobilization of their students. Purdue was already in the process of losing control of the <\/span>Exponent<\/span><\/i>, who began gaining independence in November 1968 when President Hovde tried to fire Editor William Smoot and <\/span>Exponent<\/span><\/i> staff refused to appoint a new editor. With this loss of an arguably less scandalous newspaper, Purdue administration wanted to really prevent anti-Purdue and anti-police rhetoric since they no longer had a means to reach the public via newspaper anymore. And perhaps they did have a reason to be scared, since a member of the Peace Union told the <\/span>Exponent<\/span><\/i> that they sold over 2,000 copies of the first edition of <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> on the first day.[19] News travels quickly when the right stories are being written. <\/span><\/p>\n

     So what type of content did <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> produce? <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> was more than a typical newspaper with articles and exposes- it was a piece of artwork. It included drawings, poems, photographs, sketches and full-page artistic spreads. <\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
The back page of Vol II, No. I of Bauls [20]<\/figcaption>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

     In addition to creating artistic and aesthetic spreads, <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> also wrote about very taboo and underreported stories concerning Purdue, Indiana as a whole, and other events pertaining to The Resistance. This can be seen with <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> coverage of the 1968 raid of the Indianapolis Black Panthers by police. <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> reported on this event on page two of their very first edition in an article titled \u201cNaptown Cops Attack Panthers.\u201d The contributor opened with a description of what happened, writing \u201cthe pigs have gone too far. On Wed. Dec. 19 Federal agents and the racist police department attacked the Black Panther office in Indianapolis\u2026 The cops wrecked the office, destroying the furniture and literature. After the raid $610 of Panther funds were missing. No store of weapons were found.\u201d[21] Now obviously this article had biased undertones (as seen with calling the cops pigs), however, it also had accurate and useful information about the raid and by reporting on it they were able to confirm that Indiana cops attacked and stole from a Black power group in a racially motivated raid. No other local mainstream newspaper reported on this event, so without <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i>, it is plausible to assume that many Purdue students wouldn\u2019t have even known about it. <\/span><\/p>\n

     In addition to reporting on the happenings of the Revolution throughout the state and country, <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> also wrote very specific and useful guides and advice for Purdue students. In the second issue, they released a \u201crealistic\u201d course guide with descriptions about each major department. For example, they described the History department as \u201cdevoted to the celebration of the status quo where racial oppression and imperialism are never presented as matters of policy, but rather as temporary aberrations in America\u2019s march towards its glorious destiny.\u201d[22] <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> concludes by stating \u201ccurrently, in the School of Humanities, the Department of History is a standing academic joke\u2026 History at Purdue is dusty and irrelevant. Avoid it at all costs.\u201d[23] Bauls concluded by listing around ten History professors to \u201cavoid at all costs\u201d because they \u201crank among the University\u2019s hardcore conservatives.\u201d[24] <\/span>Bauls<\/span><\/i> had a point, since many of the History classes being taught centered around Russia and the Cold War and nearly all, if not all, were taught by white men. <\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t