Civil War at the Y

About three times a week as I arrive at the law school, I pick up a copy of the Daily Universe (DU). I read it not for its deep insight or journalistic & linguistic achievements; no, I read it mostly for the letters to the editor. These letters are almost always argumentative, flawed, brash, inane and ... hilarious. But other than a good laugh, the opinion section (and the paper) typically serves little purpose.


Earlier this week, though, the DU printed an article titled "Textbook return policy puts 'tax on honesty'" prompting a controversy that, at least to me, deserves special attention.

The article dealt with a three-year-old BYU Bookstore policy. The policy says the bookstore will refuse to refund students who attempt to return a book that has been replaced by a book from another source (internet, friend, etc.). The policy is unique among Utah colleges largely because, lacking an honor code or the moral guilt that goes with it, those colleges simply have no way to enforce such a policy.

At BYU, though, guilt keeps the students, by and large, in compliance and, consequently, a subtle rift has arisen between poor students (who feel the policy is capitalism at its worst) and the bookstore (who feels the policy necessary to prevent wanton abuse of the system, allowing students to, essentially, check out books from the bookstore while they shop around for a better price).

The article, in a unique move for the DU, was pretty well balanced; both sides got in some good hits. Tom Hirtzel, head textbook guy at the bookstore, put in plenty of points and did a decent job backing the bookstore's perspective. On the other side was, among others, BYU econ. prof. Mark Showalter who, in no uncertain terms, condemned the bookstore's policy as a "tax on honesty." The editors/writers at the DU rightly clung to this phrase in their title. (I mean, it got my attention).

But other than the impartiality (in a paper renowned for its pro-BYU bias), there was nothing extraordinary about the article. And it probably would have gone the way of all issues of the DU (kindling for homeless cougars?) had the bookstore not taken its next, stunning move.

The next day, they pulled ALL of their advertising from the DU.

This was a tizzy fit of the highest order. A brash, boisterous, and blatantly bad move on the part of a Bookstore who must be riddled with self-doubt and fear that they may lose a semi-monopoly if students find out what's really going on.

As the DU pointed out in a subsequent editorial, "[p]ulling advertisements for pointing out a real, continuing subject of public dialogue is petty" - AMEN - "[t]he Bookstore's response demonstrates narrow-mindedness" - AND AMEN.

As you may know, I'm graduating soon. I've already made my last foray into the cankerous world of college textbook economics (and what a twisted, troubled world it is). But if I weren't, the Bookstore's actions would have given me all the impetus I need to NEVER BUY ANOTHER TEXTBOOK FROM THEM AGAIN (they say ALL CAPS is the written equivalent of shouting ... TRUE THAT)! I've always been upset by the Bookstore's seeming disregard for the students who keep it in business. As an arm of the University, the Bookstore should be putting us first. That they do not (and will not) is more disturbing now than ever before.

A tax on honesty? No ... what we have here is something far worse.