Crimson Editorial Chair's Ethics Questioned

A former executive of the Harvard Republican Action Committee (HRAC) revealed a two-year-old letter to an audience of about 300 last Friday questioning the journalistic integrity of Crimson Editorial Chair Daniel Altman '96.

In the letter, dated only March 5 and without a year, Altman promises then-HRAC first vice president Randall A. Fine '96 that he would write a favorable opinion piece about HRAC if Fine agreed to treat members of their Wigglesworth proctor group in a more cordial manner.

"At least tell me why this has to go on for the rest of the year," wrote Altman, who was an editor, but not an executive, on the editorial board that spring.

"Do you want me to stop saying hello to you in the Yard?" the letter continues. "I think that everyone would be happy to block with you; I find it hard to believe that you would rather you never saw any of us again."

"I would even write a favorable HRAC ed[itorial] if I thought it would make a difference. What can I do?"

Fine produced the letter last Friday at a panel called "Students in the News," organized for Junior Parents' Weekend.

Fine, a member of the panel, pulled the letter from a file folder he brought with him after Crimson Managing Editor Sarah E. Scrogin '96, also a panel member, asked him to provide proof for his claims against Altman.

No favorable piece about HRAC written by Altman ever appeared in The Crimson.

Still, Fine charged in an interview yesterday that Altman's promise of such a piece illustrates a lack of journalistic integrity.

"It's selling your influence in a position of great responsibility," Fine said. "To abuse that position of influence [shows] a flagrant lack of ethical judgment."

Altman defended himself by pointing to the extreme tensions running through Wigglesworth J/K at that time over sophomore year rooming plans.

Altman, Fine and several other members of the proctor group acknowledged that personal emotions between the two were intense, with Fine allegedly threatening Altman physically.

And Altman had written an opinion piece attacking HRAC ("Pandemonium on the Right," February 27, 1993) just days before his letter to Fine was written.

Given the circumstances, Altman said, the last sentence was merely intended to illustrate a point. "I was trying to show Randy how far he had become entrenched in his actions," he said. "I was trying to show him how hard it was to cast out a line to him."

"This was an idle hypothesis," Altman added. "I think my editors would have been shocked if I had [written the opinion piece]. I never seriously considered writing a [positive] editorial about the HRAC; to do so would have been utterly ridiculous."

But Fine attacked Altman's defense as a "pitiful attempt to rationalizewhat is a clear statement written in this letter."

He also said that the personal rifts betweenhimself and Altman had developed that spring onlybecause of the latter's "lack of ethics."

Crimson President Andrew L. Wright '96 wasquick to defend Altman. "In no way does thisundermine my confidence in Dan," Wright said. "Ihold him in the highest ethical regard."

Wright questioned Fine's motivations inintroducing the letter at this time.

Fine, who unsuccessfully ran for president ofthe Undergraduate Council last month, has beenunfavorably portrayed on The Crimson's opinionpage several times since Altman has been editorialchair.

Fine's ethics were repeatedly called intoquestion based on alleged misconduct in 1993, in aRepublican Club election and as secretary of theUndergraduate Council.

Wright referred all questions about editorialpractice to the editorial chairs.

"Obviously, the editorial board would beopposed to the use of space on the editorial pagefor the purpose of repaying others for personalfavors or private slights," said Crimson AssociateEditorial Chair David B. Lat '96.

And Joanna M. Weiss '94, who was editorialchair of The Crimson at the time Altman wrote theletter, said in a n interview yesterday that theletter represented "inappropriate conduct."

But Weiss said that Altman's mistakes were theresult of youth and inexperience, and should notbe held against him.

"I don't think you should be crucified forthings you did in the learning process," Weisssaid

He also said that the personal rifts betweenhimself and Altman had developed that spring onlybecause of the latter's "lack of ethics."

Crimson President Andrew L. Wright '96 wasquick to defend Altman. "In no way does thisundermine my confidence in Dan," Wright said. "Ihold him in the highest ethical regard."

Wright questioned Fine's motivations inintroducing the letter at this time.

Fine, who unsuccessfully ran for president ofthe Undergraduate Council last month, has beenunfavorably portrayed on The Crimson's opinionpage several times since Altman has been editorialchair.

Fine's ethics were repeatedly called intoquestion based on alleged misconduct in 1993, in aRepublican Club election and as secretary of theUndergraduate Council.

Wright referred all questions about editorialpractice to the editorial chairs.

"Obviously, the editorial board would beopposed to the use of space on the editorial pagefor the purpose of repaying others for personalfavors or private slights," said Crimson AssociateEditorial Chair David B. Lat '96.

And Joanna M. Weiss '94, who was editorialchair of The Crimson at the time Altman wrote theletter, said in a n interview yesterday that theletter represented "inappropriate conduct."

But Weiss said that Altman's mistakes were theresult of youth and inexperience, and should notbe held against him.

"I don't think you should be crucified forthings you did in the learning process," Weisssaid