Price of legitimacy

In every election cycle, controversy rears its ugly head. The IU Student Association elections are no exception. This time, however, that ugly head had what appeared to be an innocent face on it.\nFor those of you who didn't catch Wednesday's story, it goes like this:\nSome staffers for the Connect IUSA ticket went out early Tuesday morning to put out campaign flyers. Some Connect-ers thought it might be a good idea to stuff some flyers into copies of this newspaper, and then put the papers back into the boxes.\nI know they were just trying to help, but that brings about two problems. One, the Indiana Daily Student didn't authorize the ads. Yes, this is a free paper, but we still control what goes in it. Two, letting Connect do that on an election day makes the IDS appear to have endorsed the ticket.\nHere's where the ethics get sticky. The Connect executives met with the publisher, Dave Adams, and he explained to them why their actions could result in a civil suit. To make restitution, Connect offered to pay the standard rate for inserts.\nSurprisingly, using unauthorized advertising isn't against IUSA elections code. Not paying for it and leaving it unaccounted is. No one here has any idea what Connect's motivation was when ticket executives decided to come by and pay us. Our publisher and management staff believe the Connect executives didn't know their staff was stuffing our papers, but no one can be sure that Connect didn't come forth with payment to escape the elections code spending violations.\nEven without knowing that, suddenly, Connect's future was partly dependent upon what the IDS management decided to do. Another issue that arose was precedent -- if the IDS decided to take the payment after the fact, other groups could stuff our papers and then expect the same deal. If we did not accept the payment and also didn't sue, we'd be rolling over for them, and other groups who stuffed our papers could expect the same.\nThe IDS decided to accept the payment and ran a story about it the next day.\nThat, I believe, was the wrong thing to do. \nIf another student group, say, the IU role-playing club, decided to stuff our papers with advertisements, it would have been just as wrong in a civil law sense, but much less of a public issue. \n"We would have taken care of that in-house, if we found out at all," said Managing Editor Kelly Phillips.\nThe Connect gaffe should have been of much greater concern because the Connect members were running for political office. We as newsgatherers are supposed to hold politicians to higher standards, because the readers also expect more from their public servants. The fact that Connect was running for office at the time of their mistake should have meant they wouldn't get off so easily for their errors. By accepting its money, the IDS possibly played a role in keeping Connect in the race, despite the ticket's mistake.\nBy the same token, if we hadn't taken the money, the IDS could have gotten Connect kicked out of the race.\nEither way, the ticket's problem wasn't, and should not have been, our problem. The IDS should have refused the money and written a story about what happened. When we accepted money, we became a player in the political process, and that is one game a newspaper should never suit up for. And the political game is one that a news organization likely will not win.