Criticisms leveled at new BruinCard

Wednesday, October 22, 1997

Criticisms leveled at new BruinCard

BRUINCARD Opponents question commercial partnership with
AT&T

By Brooke Bridgford

Daily Bruin Contributor

Ever since the AT&T logo appeared on the new BruinCard,
there has been much clamor on the campus. Some students have
supported the issue; many others have been critical.

The relationship between AT&T and UCLA is a corporate
partnership and is nowadays common on college campuses,
administrators said. UCLA BruinCard officials say that the
alternative was to charge the students for the identification
cards. There is a $10 fee for a registration card at some colleges
in Florida.

Instead of charging students, however, UCLA chose to strike a
deal with AT&T to cut the costs of re-carding the campus
community. The university also thought they would be benefiting
students as well.

The overall idea for the new BruinCard was initially to help the
students, administrators said.

"We saw it as a good thing," said Dorothy Webster, the Director
of Student Accounting and the BruinCard office.

"The systems we have implemented are to make it more convenient
for the students," she added.

The BruinCard office felt that there needed to be a uniform card
that consolidated as many functions as possible.

According to Joseph Megie, the BruinCard’s Center Operations
Manager, the identification card features Easy Pay, which functions
as a debit account, and a calling card option. It also serves as
the UCLA library card and residence hall keys.

By winter quarter, the BruinCard will also serve as the
registration card, the recreation center card, and the Central
Ticket Office will use the BruinCard for selling tickets. There are
endless possibilities, Megie said.

The most controversial aspect of the card, however, has been
AT&T’s involvement.

Despite the advantages of the new BruinCard, many students are
still upset over the partnership. Joseph Doherty, a graduate
student in public policy, took a strong stand against AT&T. He
wrote a letter to Chancellor Albert Carnesale and various other
individuals expressing his dissatisfaction.

His letter stated, "The presence of AT&T’s logo on an
official state document is an inappropriate endorsement of a
private institution … It is inappropriate to place a commercial
logo on a mandatory, state-issued student ID card … I would like
my student ID card re-issued without the AT&T logo on it."

Kenny Kast, a second-year art student, agreed.

"They are forcing us to advertise for AT&T. They should pay
us for helping them," he said.

Others were concerned over an outside institution handling
campus concerns.

"I feel that telecommunications is a program that should be run
by the school, not a private corporation," said Krista Greksouk, a
second-year English student.

Another concern was that the BruinCard keeps track of all users’
records and transactions. Every time something is paid for with the
BruinCard, a record is made of it – and AT&T has access to
those records. Doherty also addressed this issue in his letter.

"I have concerns about the co-mingling of student academic
records with the commercial data generated from use of the card …
I would like to see the BruinCard transaction records physically
segregated from academic and personal records," wrote Doherty.
Since the academic number is the same used for the BruinCard
transactions, Doherty worries that AT&T may have access to more
than commercial records.

A bid was put out to corporations to help UCLA with the
re-carding of the 33,000 students and faculty and staff on campus.
AT&T was the only company to respond to the bid. They offered
to support the carding event and give UCLA the necessary equipment
to make and track the cards, including computers and cameras.

In return, AT&T is allowed to offer their calling card to
the students, faculty and staff. This feature is optional and
anyone can refuse it.

In addition, with the calling card, there is a 30 percent
discount on phone calls. Also, the Student Advantage Card, which
features discounts at nearby businesses, is available along with
the calling card. University officials felt it would be better for
students to save money instead of spend it.

There are students and faculty who support this idea.

"It’s okay because we have to make money somehow. And if it
helps lower tuition, then why not make money through
commercialization?" said Mike Silberfarb, a second-year economics
student.

Law Professor Ugene Volokh, agreed. "Advertising supports city
buses. Why shouldn’t it also support our students? It is a means of
raising money.

"The university can either raise money from the students, the
taxpayers, or advertisers," he continued.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *