Readers Write (April 22): Earth Day, suicide and '13 Reasons Why', distracted driving, the U journalism school, the hippie lifestyle

In view of Earth Day, I would ask people to compare the status of the current global warming issue to cigarette smoking in the 1960s. As was the case then, there is considerable evidence, using both good science and bad, to take either side of the issue. With smoking, if you decided you were wrong and stopped, the damage for most was already done. It occurred over a gradual time period and was still likely to end your life early or cause a lot of suffering. Again, with global warming, if doubters are wrong, regardless of the primary cause, the damage is occurring over time. You personally may not pay, unless you own coastal Florida real estate, but our children will pay the price. It will have an irreversible outcome in at least the next few lifetimes. Interestingly, it dwarfs the effect of global terrorism. Yet, we are doing everything reasonable and unreasonable to combat the perceived threat of terrorism.

Lauren Abdill's April 15 commentary "There's no reason to buy '13 Reasons Why' imagery" addresses concerns about content in Netflix's hit show, but the author goes too far. Adbill portrays the show and its creators as reckless and implies that the content could be directly responsible for millions of future tragedies. This is in reference to the show's graphic depiction of the main character committing suicide. Would she prefer to minimize the horror and finality of suicide or perhaps to censor it altogether? In my opinion, to downplay the seriousness would be a disservice. And if we are worried about the risk of children and young adults copying violent images, then we should have long been inhibiting disturbing content in all forms.

Showing the terrible effects of suicide is important, as is exposing bullying, sexual assault, rape and other issues that teenagers and adults encounter in the world today. In doing so, the show helps create awareness and fosters meaningful and important discussions about critical issues. On the other hand, I do agree with the author's main point: Parents need to step up, have difficult conversations and show understanding. We all need to be informed, responsible consumers.

This is in response to the April 20 editorial regarding distracted driving:

I had heard rumors that part of the reason to pass this law was to make it easier to prosecute people for texting and driving. As you may be aware, the crash rate for people talking on a handheld phone vs. a Bluetooth or non-handheld device is virtually the same, so I am wondering why this was never brought up by the media or people with this knowledge. The only real answer is to ban any use of phones for any purpose while driving except for preprogrammed GPS apps.

I will tell you a brief story about a guy that passed me going at least 70 miles per hour while talking on his phone. I happened to know the guy. About three or four miles down the road, we came to a red light with two lanes of traffic. In the right lane, the front vehicle was a semi, with the second vehicle being the guy who passed me still talking on his phone. Obviously in a hurry, he was still talking on his phone. When I saw the semi in the right lane, I made a lane change to the left lane and passed the semi and the guy talking on the phone, because as most of us know, loaded semis cannot accelerate as fast as cars. Talking to the man later, he said he was running late for an event.

I believe the man is much more intelligent than I and that if he had not been talking on the phone he would also have been in the left lane to get around the semi quicker. The point of the story is (and I share this with all of my driving education students) — moving around a stopped semi at a traffic light is a very simple driving maneuver, and this person did not cognitively recognize this. So my question is, what if he would have had to take in two or three simultaneous happenings around him to avoid a crash? Would he have been able to do it? I believe he would not have been able to, since he wasn't able to make a very simple decision involving one variable. This seems to go along with the research that using a handheld device vs. a Bluetooth or hands-free device has the same crash rate.

As a former reporter who worked for 23 years in the newsroom at KSTP-TV for locally owned Hubbard Broadcasting Inc., it's my humble opinion that there couldn't be a more fitting name for a school poised to inspire the next generation of journalists.

The University of Minnesota's marketing mantra is "Driven to Discover," and no broadcasting pioneer has been more driven to make advances in broadcasting than the Hubbard family. They owned the first radio station in the country to completely be supported by advertising. They also operated the first TV station west of the Mississippi to broadcast in color. In addition, they were instrumental in the development and launching of the first digital satellite system for television in 1994. The Hubbard family has without a doubt been driven to discover in all of the 92 years they have been in the communications industry.

Affiliating the Hubbard name to SJMC signals a new era on campus. An era in which education and industry work together to meet the challenges of both today and tomorrow.

• • •

As a longtime faculty member in the University of Minnesota School of Journalism and Mass Communication, I was most appreciative of the support the school has received from the Hubbard family. Such media industry support, along with generous legislative support in the remodeling of Murphy Hall, has been valuable for the growth and development of this academic unit.

There are, indeed other media schools with prominent names. Two that come to mind are the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University, and the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University. These names recognize historically stellar journalistic performance, rather than philanthropic support.

For eight decades, SJMC at the university has been housed in Murphy Hall, named after the original publisher of this newspaper. The school during those years has enjoyed considerable long-term support from the Murphy endowment, but the Murphy name never became officially attached to the school's name.

That is as it should be.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading "The Hippies Were Right" in the April 20 Taste section. I first was exposed to this way of living in the early 1980s when I was in my early 20s, and it has been a guiding light for me ever since. The article brought back fond memories from the '80s of Hatha Yoga classes and retreats, filling bins and cutting cheese as a volunteer at the Mississippi Market when it was just a hole in the wall, and growing my own sprouts. I got to know some organic farmers and frequented the New Riverside and Seward Cafes. This focus on eating natural whole foods and engaging in mind-body practices has served me well. I am now 57 and feel great. I enjoy an occasional cheeseburger and fries, but am always pulled back to this simple, healthy lifestyle — and to add, it's planet-friendly! It is heartening to see so many people embracing it today.