I did not intend to find myself on this blog. I work for Apollo group (owns University of Phoenix). I was looking up information on the Arizona State University Web Site and got to this Blog some how.

I found that Mr. Wright's responses are exactly how I hope and aspire to communicate one day. This is relevant to a subject I assume this Blog is on... China I think. When individuals communicate with technology on the web it is so important to have as much tact, professionalism, and respect if anything is to be understood or have a positive outcome.

It seems like the individuals are reading into and making a bigger deal than really is there with the decisions the University makes.

Privacy is a right in the United States and there is many business deal transactions, policy's, relationships, that are cultivated on an intimate basis and the groups may not need to share everything with the public. I do not wish to share my clients and business partners conversations, relationships, and business with the world. The issue with Mormons is ridiculous...fraternity's, special interest groups, business owners like "the Library", "Fascinations", "Trails", all have worked out agreements with a voice from the University...Mormons are not just a small interest group but a very large, successful, influential, group of people. I am Catholic and I pride myself on what groups, activities, sponsorships, and involvement my faith gives to the University. It really should not be discussed in terms of the "Mormons" but individuals. If Fulton was Methodist, Catholic, Born again...would the religion be brought up if the attributed faith was expanding parking? Honestly ask yourself Eric, if issues had no ties to Mormons and it was another faith such as Muslims...would you be bring the faith into it. I do not think you would. I think you would mention only their professional and Investment Ventures involved in their lives. The faith has nothing to do with the business and personal professional ideas, thoughts, decisions, partnership, and alike. In any policy or business activity does anything document or mention "because I am X Faith...or Since I am Y Faith...I move to ..." Come on...China/American relations will not be to effective if the focus is on the faith and not the business/policy issues that will help the two countries work well in the future.

Mr. Wright can help refine my speech, terms, approach any day...You are very intelligent, cool headed, thought provoking, and I wish I had you as a business relations mentor.

My only question to Mr. Crow would be, where do you stand on all of this blogging? Not one word since Dec. 23rd. Makes me wonder why even do this?

People who refer to this type of talk as non-relevant to the issue of china are greatly mistaken. Arizona Universities do have one of the lowest retention rates among universities nation wide, is something we should all brag about because our education system in Arizona stinks; but to not say anything about the accusations, about dealing's with mormons, or other money handling people is a great disappointment. With the alarming rate at which people refuse to identify themselves out of fear for repercussions is incredible.

I do think that these accusations are very relevant to the china relations because this is not how to do business, but how to get business done. So on one hand I am sad for you Mr. Crow but on the other hand if you want money you know where to go. Try and teach some of this to the Chinese government. Back door deals are always the best! But keep your feet grounded as the impact you are hoping to make with the "New American University" very well could flop over on you.

Greetings Dr. Crow,

All in all, I haven't much to say on any of the serious issues at this time, but have a question that does have some impelcations.

With this being the final Fiesta Bowl in our stadium, is the administration looking to bid to hold another bowl in replacement?

Just a light hearted thought for the night. I wish we could make it to a good bowl sometime.

Shana,

I don't feel your question should be ignored, but rather it demonstrates an important issue in our relations with China.

To clarify, the first time I offered to yield the "last word" was to Steven, but the second time was to Eric. My understanding is that offering to yield the last word is a courtesy, a token of respect. But clearly, this is not how you understood my gesture. In each case, I was sincere, so I regret that it did not come across this way. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

This misunderstanding highlights the challenges of communicating across cultures, such as between the US and China. Meaningful discourse must account for the differences in perceptions that might arise, and extra efforts must be made to ensure that the intended meaning is conveyed. On the other hand, it also requires people to give each other the benefit of the doubt when an offense is perceived as it may not have been intentional.

David

p.s. this will be my last post for while. It seems few people are interested in talking about relations with China.

I've been following this dialogue for a few days now and must admit I'm slightly more inclined to agree with Eric on most issues addressed here. I won't jump in quite yet, but do have a quick question for David.

You state in your most recent post to Mr. Young, "If you respond, I'll let you have the last word."

Excuse me, but didn't you already say that in an entirely different post the day before? Why did you say it the first time if you didn't mean it? I admit this question is petty, but I'm curious to know whether you realize how equally supercilious and disdainful your 'I'll give you the last word because I'm the better man' line comes across, particularly the second time around.

Just curious,

Shana

P.S. Feel free to completely ignore this post. Then I'll have the last word! Yippee! Yippee! The last word, oh wow! Did I get it? Did I get it?

Eric,

To summarize, your concerns are worthy of explanation, and I regret that you reject my views. Your use of the term "policy" is reasonable and appropriate; although mine was more specific, its not wrong. If I appear supportive, perhaps its because I am merely being respectful, and if I appear servile (sycophant?), perhaps its because I am more interested in a cooperative dialogue rather than a confrontational one. I just think that more will be possible with this blog doing it that way. You do it your way, I'll do it mine, but in any case, I think we agree this blog is too good an opportunity to waste.

If I may, I'd like to offer an excerpt from A New Page, the first thread on The President's Post: "...let me say that I aspire for this dialogue to be different than what you might find on other university-related discussion sites, which seem less like proactive conversations on provocative ideas, and more about aimless complaining. As long as we're setting out to use technology for its highest purpose, I hope you will submit comments that are useful, sophisticated, and that advance fruitful discussion."

If you respond, I'll let you have the last word.

David

Definition of "policy"

I want to you tell that you are wrong, but I prefer to let Dr. Crow explain it to you.

1. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a foreign "policy" think tank.
2. You have been so supportive and therefore deserve his time.
3. While he explains what "policy" is to you; he can not lectures "freedom of speech" to others.

Fair enough.

To be sure, your points are worthy of consideration and demonstrate the importance of having controversial decisions explained to the community, as I suggested in my post to the Continuous Improvement thread.

My point was not to defend those decisions, but rather to suggest that sometimes there may be more issues involved than meet the eye, especially in a complex place like ASU, and since each situation is unique, many factors must be weighed.

Finally, my interest in your comment about "policy" relates primarily to the fact that there are several mechanisms at ASU for reviewing and recommending changes to written policy. Administrative decisions, i.e. the kind of policy you had in mind, are much more difficult to get a handle on.

David,

I did not said the university has a written policy that restricted the Freedom of Speech, China which is rule by a totalitarian regime, has a written constitution that protects the Freed of Speech as well as many other Human Rights. The reality is this constitution has been violated by every level of the government (you don't much of that in CCTV). The point I would like to make is: the word "policy" has a boarder definition than what been written and published, but also what has been enforced.

David I don't mind if you defend Dr Crow's decision, in fact I am a BIG FAN of Michael Crow for all the progresses ASU has made since he took office. On the other hand I am deeply disappointed for his position in Freedom of Speech, in sharp contrast the faculties of Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication has unanimously supports the efforts of the State Press in exercising its First Amendment rights. I won't blame Mr. Fulton if he decided not to give any more money to ASU; I think Dr. Crow should state that principles are not for sale. The faculty in Cronkite School care about the financial future of the university too, they just believe principles are a higher priority.

For Presidential Debate, the contents of art exhibit were created by individual artists. Fairness of the university was based on how ASU influenced the contents of exhibit NOT the actual contents of it. By remove contents relate to Mr. Bush, The university administrator did a good job to keep the debate in our campus. In term of fairness and non-partisan this is bad example. I think Dr. Crow knew some candidate were like to cancel the debate the other.

The Child Development Lab was give way to more parking spaces. What parking spaces? parking space for the Mormons! I would say this was a very unusual move and the university administration should be more open about this.

I don't see any significant complaints on play by a Hugh Downs School of Communication graduate student, critical of the Mormon faith. I don't see any open protest. Backroom politics may be favored by a small group of people, but it's not in the interest of the university as a whole.

Steven,

With all due respect, I disagree. Blog technology is revolutionary precisely because it empowers any individual to determine the purpose, content and conduct of a world-wide public forum on any topic they wish. Yet at the same time, it does not obligate that person to respond to the various demands visitors may post.

This is why the internet is such a powerful force in the evolution of democracy and capitalism in China, and is one reason why I'm sure ASU is building on internet technology in its programs there.

One benefit of this technology is that blog owners and visitors can remain anonymous, thus allowing them to share important information that might not otherwise be possible to share. But, one downside is that anonymity seems to inspire some people to post invective without being accountable. I don't understand why they do this, but where there is no accoutability, there is always abuse. Do you suppose the Chinese sense of internet etiquette differs from ours?

Wouldn't it be better to offer cogent insights and original ideas related to the topic of the blog? And if the topic you want to discuss is not listed, why not create your own blog? (www.blogspot.com) If you do, let me know and I'll be sure to visit!

Happy New Year!

David

p.s. if you reply, I'll let you have the last word.

David,

From your posting: "I wish more people would stay focussed on the topic selected by the President. He invests effort in each new blog, but it hardly seems to matter. Some people seem to feel he's inviting them to vent their spleen, hurl anonymous invective, grind an axe, or meander down their own stream-of-consciousness."

You need to understand that this blog does not entitle the president to cherry-pick those topics that he deems fit. Its obvious he is using this blog to project himself as a visionary leader rather than have a back-and-forth with students and address their issues. He has not answered very many questions. Look back and count the number of issues raised that he has not even answered yet. We need to have Crow be a little honest and sycophants like you to stop sniffing Crow's throne.

Eric,

While I don't mind answering your question, who I am is not germane to this thread and the act of asking feels like a violation of blog etiquette.

No, this is not me, but I too discovered this person some time ago when I googled my own name, which seems to be fairly common.

If I may, I take this opportunity to comment on the nature of some posts I have seen on this blogsite. First, I wish more people would stay focussed on the topic selected by the President. He invests effort in each new blog, but it hardly seems to matter. Some people seem to feel he's inviting them to vent their spleen, hurl anonymous invective, grind an axe, or meander down their own stream-of-consciousness. Its not that these posts aren't legitimate opinions, but rather they are out of context for the given thread. It is these kinds of posts that discourage other executives from engaging the public directly through sites like this one. And as for posts not being published, it has already been explained that a technical problem with the spam/profanity filter was responsible, not censorship for political correctness.

If I could have my way, each post would relate somehow to the original post by the President. Therefore, I close with the following question: What does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

David

David,

Are you the David P. Wright featured in the following website?

http://www.lds-mormon.com/dpw.shtml

Eric,

Thomas Jefferson said "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance".

All of us must be alert for any undue influences on freedom of speech or academic freedom, be they financial, political, religious or bureaucratic.

Regarding the last, can you be more specific about which policies you feel may restrict freedom of speech?

I think Michael Crow needs to answer for all these reports regarding his dealings with the Mormons. However, my guess is that he will dodge the issue. This blog is a sham meant only to promote himself using the school as a pedestal. This man deserves no respect. Lets see if he publishes this post at all.

Eric,

I deeply respect your concerns. However, without knowing the details, its very hard to judge discretionary actions, which are what these appear to be (not policies). In each case, I suspect many factors were considered, but ultimately, a choice had to be made between competing interests, according to some sense of what was best for the institution or the greater good.

For example, without defending these decisions, I can see that in the case of the play, any production that caused significant complaints should have been reviewed, and if the complaints were justified, some action should have been taken. In this case, it appears preserving an environment that promotes respect for individuals was favored over academic freedom to criticize a particular religion. You may be right that money had something to do with it, but maybe not everything.

As for the art exhibit and the Presidential Debate, I can see that any demonstration of partisianship by any host institution could jeopardize the nation's perceptions of fairness to each candidate. Furthermore, it would have been too disruptive to the national election to cancel the debate over one art exhibit in one gallery at one university.

As for the Child Development Lab and Institute of Religion, reportedly the outcome will be more parking on campus, and there is already a very nice new playground on the north side of the CDL. Unless there is something illegal or unethical about the land swap, to me this is just real estate management.

As for the State Press, that's a different issue because freedom of the press is a fundamental part of our democracy. Yet, we need to give student journalists the freedom to learn from their decisions, including when they offend their benefactors, just like in "real life". Not that they shouldn't do this, we all need to be offended from time to time. But rather, they should not be insulated from the truth that there will always be real costs with almost everything they do that matters, because there are people out there who would like for them to be intimidated into reporting only what is safe, politically correct or irrelevant. (Personally, I would prefer that the State Press choose to do this with a topic more important than body piercing.)

In any case, that we feel free to dissent and openly challenge such decisions distinguishes us from many in China, no?

I am impressed with CCTV, Central China TV, broadcast from Beijing. It provides high quality international news, as well as cultural, business, science and educational programming. Clearly, China is a juggernaut that is coming into its own as a major player on the world stage, economically, politically and socially. While I'm sure this programming is taylored to present China most favorably to the West, I must admit that much of what I see seems quite reasonable, and consistent with what I know of China from my many Chinese friends here at ASU.

Based on your experience with China so far, what would the Chinese have us learn about them, their ideas and ideals, and their goals for engaging the US, especially our universities?

Thanks Fultons and Congratulations Dr. Crow for the $100 million gift to ASU.

The fund includes $25 million discretionary fund to Dr. Crow to invest in his special projects and initiatives. This is what Mr.Fulton likes to say about Dr.Crow

"I feel so fortunate to have that man running our university. I don't give this kind of money away to people. This guy deserves it, earns it, and he'll invest it properly."

Well said. Again Thanks Fultons and Congratulations Dr.Crow

Go Devils

David,

Here is what I found alarming

*Days before Fulton griped about the State Press, a play by a Hugh Downs School of Communication graduate student, critical of the Mormon faith, was indefinitely postponed after Mormon faculty and church members, as well as students, took their complaints all the way to the administration.

*Phoenix New Times reported in July 04, the ASU Art Museum censored its own exhibition, "Democracy in America," by cutting anti-George W. Bush art from the show ("Heil to the Chief," July 1, and "Bush League," August 19), only after Crow got wind of the liberal bent and demanded the curatorial process include his input, so that the Commission on Presidential Debates wouldn't pull the October 13 event because of a perceived partisan art exhibition.

*Crow agreed to swap state land on campus occupied by ASU's psychology department with the Mormons' privately owned LDS Institute of Religion, so that the church could build a parking lot and garage to go along with an expansion in the center of campus. Such a move would most seriously affect the department's Child Study Lab, where the lab's adjacent playground will be razed to make way for the LDS parking garage.

I want to ask Dr. Crow why is the Mormon parking garage has a priority over the Child Study Lab.

Concerned student and Dr. Crown,

My concern is Dr. Crow's policies may restrict the Freedom of Speech in our campus. The rapid grow in the Phoenix area provides a unique opportunity for ASU to become a great public university. I hope ASU can join the rank of University of Wisconsin-Madison and UC Berkeley, or at least going that direction. I wonder Dr. Crow can name one top tier university in the US which is not embrace Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom.

My other concern is influence from religious group such as the LDS (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) a.k.a. the Mormons to ASU. The media has reported a wealthy LDS member voiced his "displeasure" on the State Press Magazine to the ASU president's office prior to the university to threatening to sever all financial support to State Press.

http://www.splc.org/newsflash_archives.asp?id=918&year=2004

The university should not influence or dictate a student newspaper's contents because it provides part of the funding to the newspaper. Similarly our university should NOT influenced by a religious group because its members are among the major donors for our university. I love our university, therefore I don't want ASU to become "BYU-south".

Eric,

If the after effect of Dr. Crow's policies is to alter ASU's image as a party place, I don't see how that could be wrong. After all, isn't the primary purpose of going to an university to shape one's career ? A party image for
one's university will certainly be detrimental in his/her job search and career. Unless of course you care more about the fun rather than the primary purpose as to why you are here.

Dr Crow,

Its increasingly looking like only sycophants can get their suggestions enacted on your blog. I have posted 3 times regarding the International Student Office. You have not responded even once. What gives?

Dr. Crow

I am strongly agreed with Alexander Perkins that all students in the university should have free access to uncensored media. I am more worry about censorship here in ASU Temple campus. I have read an article from Phoenix New Times entitled "Quid Pro Crow: ASU's president puts the squeeze on freedom of speech to please his biggest donor".

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/issues/2004-11-18/news/feature.html

Did you threatening to sever all financial support for the State Press after the State Press Magazine featured a provocative black-and-white full-page cover photo of a curvaceous female breast pierced through the nipple? Is that fact or fiction?

Dr. Crow,

I agree with you, I strongly believe that more interaction with China can only lead to better understandind. I commend the school for expanding into that area. However, education will be stunted in a country which so closely controls the media and its dissidents. I speak from experiance, having lived there for some years. I strongly encourage you to moniter what is being taught there, and to ensure that all students enrolled have free acess to the uncensored media.