Talk:Michael Crow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Columbia University WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Columbia University, her schools, environs, and people. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group. | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Arizona, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Arizona. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Start-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Criticism (Opinion)
This article sounds too much like an advertisement and needs to be edited for impartiality and objectivity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.202.39 (talk) 15:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
"Michael Crow has 'corporatized' Arizona State University, creating an environment of market-like competition. This model may be appropriate for corporations, however the purpose of a university is not to maximize profit. Some aspects of his leadership are distancing the university administration from both students and faculty. He also encourages tuition increases at a rate which many believe to be beyond reason." -Anonymous
"Arizona State University is a traditional university, and Michael Crow is attempting to transform it into what he regards as 'The New American University.' Like any organization, many people aren't comfortable with change, and they need to be convinced that the new way is truly the better way. Where Dr. Crow fails as a leader, is in failing to actively convince people of the need for his change initiatives. He leads in a very top down 'theory X' manner, rather than a collaborative and inspirational way. People are afraid to openly criticize Dr. Crow for fear of punishment or adverse retribution. Perhaps to some extent he does use enthusiasm to motivate and inspire people, but he also leads by fear. To those around him in his inner circle of friends and educators he may be a passionate and impressive man, but to many in the university he is just a name - pushing changes for which no rationale or reason is provided. Dr. Crow needs to work on being more like Martin Luther King, and less like Darth Vader." -Anonymous
"Dr. Crow is well known in the Phoenix area to be a controversial leader. He has had several confrontations with local media and less well publicized confrontations with government officials."
It's not unverifiable at all. Do a search on "Michael Crow" and you can find numerous written articles specifically criticizing his leadership. The Phoenix New Times has published many of them. I don't think it's a stretch to call him controversial, neither is that an unfavorable accusation anyhow. If you want verification, speak with university students, speak with his subordinates (with the promise of anonymity of course). He IS controversial, loved and hated by people passionately. The public criticism is beyond what other public figures attract. The two statements above are very general, and only scratch the surface of accusations made against him. Read ASU Inc if you would like to explore more about Crow's controversial leadership.
I think it would be fair and balanced for the page entry to explore such strong opinions about him, and I think it is positively skewed to exclude them. Crow has hecklers, like any leader, and perhaps gets personally attacked for his actions, but again, we need to be fair and balanced.
[edit] Plagiarism of original content
CORRECTION: Original source of the text cited in the false accusation below - www.asu.edu/president/meetthepresident.
This page was largely plagiarized by user Mdesquer on 23:36, 16 February 2007. I have found the original source of Mdesquer's information, which is verbatim off a press release page on NAU's website here. Although the information started out as blatant plagiarism, the page has since changed somewhat, and obviously in the process of changing further. So copyright violation should not be an issue with more work and a few more iterations. To answer the question of why it doesn't seem objective, the original was not written objectively, but it was in fact a positively skewed press release. I have added facts, as well as added a criticism section, which should be maintained and even expanded to promote balance.
So, apparently the material wasn't plagiarized from NAU's website, but from ASU's website. Makes no difference, just the same, someone copied over material without citing the source. The fact that it is an official page on the servers of Micheal Crow's university only emphasizes that the source material is positively skewed.
[edit] New page started
I've started a new page at Michael Crow/Temp, without copyvio and hopefully without quite so much PR puffery. -- Kazrak 04:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
In reality, Micheal Crow's clashes with the The State Press are minor and insignificant, and the "Clashes" section is flagrant self aggrandization by someone who obviously is or was employed by The State Press.
There should be more emphasis on ASU's drastic climb in rankings since he took office, rather than petty accusations on who he upset at the school's newspaper. 162.135.0.6 00:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clashes with the State Press
It should be noted that President Michael Crow's actual request of the State Press was that the newspaper establish a formal editorial policy in order to address inquiries regarding the publication's content. Mdesquer 23:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
In 2003, a memorable State Press spoof cover featured a simulated photo of ASU president Michael Crow passed out in a bathtub, with vomit on his shirt and a bottle of cheap vodka cradled on his arm. Crow later complained about the photo to the State Press editorial board.
In spring 2004, an article about alleged mistreatment of employees at ASU's Department of Residential Life was criticized as one-sided by the department.
State Press Magazine created a stir in fall 2004 by publishing a full-page cover photo of a woman's naked, pierced breast on its cover; the publication drew criticism from prominent conservatives and ASU boosters such as Ira Fulton, who felt the university's administration needed to have more oversight regarding editorial decisions.
The incident may have led to the actions alleged in a November 2004 Phoenix New Times article, "Quid Pro Crow: ASU's president puts the squeeze on freedom of speech to please his biggest donor" Quid Pro Crow. The article drew national attention and was featured on several media news Web sites. The paper also won an award for the way it handled pressure from the administration concerning content.
[edit] Unreliable Source: Phoenix New Times
Removing biased information sourced only to the New Times because The Phoenix New Times just isn't a reliable source for an encyclopedia entry. I already learned this lesson the hard way, see Talk:Anthem,_Arizona, a discussion resulting from when I attempted to use it for a source for information regarding possible problems with homes in Anthem before knowing better. The author of the 2004 article has also apparently admitted to felonies [1] related to covering gambling debt by ripping off several salons.
Based only on the content here and in the New Times headlines, I might expect to see some serious censorship related to squeezing out some corporate bucks, maybe a hush up job or something. Instead, I discovered that the objection was to featuring a picture of a large metal object embedded in a nipple and breast on the cover of the student newspaper, and that the "censorship" in question was merely that the University wouldn't pay to produce such a work, not that anyones ability to attend classes, teach, or receive degrees at the university was threatened if such a work were ever distributed.
There bound to be plenty of valid criticism out there, but focusing on the fluff presented in the New Times discredits this entire article, criticism and praise alike. Zaphraud 06:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] References
[edit] Cleanup
It looks like at some point, a PR person for Crow came in and dressed up the article with fabulous comments and made it look like Crow's resume. I removed most of the PR material so it is back to a encyclopedic biography. --Bloodzombie 21:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
