Investigative Report

My report is on the recent issue of Penn State banning shot glasses with Penn State logos in order to address the high-risk drinking that Penn State has become so famous for. Because of this it is difficult for me to pick a scene but after thinking about it my opening scene would be a description of the downtown stores which used to sell these shot glasses. On East College Avenue alone multiple stores such as Lion's Pride, the Student Bookstore and Mclanahan's all sold Penn State shot glasses both for their use in student drinking and novelty items. Shelves would be dedicated to all different types of shot glasses. These shot glasses had such things as the Penn State logo, the lion shrine, the Nittany lion and the university seal, all of which are banned now from appearing on shot glasses. When the announcement of banning shot glasses was made, these shops were flooded with students trying to get their hands on what could be some of the last ever made Penn State shot glasses. Now a shot glass with a Penn State logo can be found in almost every students' dorm or apartment. However most these shot glasses aren't being used in fear of breaking them. Most are displayed as a trophy on a ledge or desk for all future students who aren't lucky enough to own one to see.

So far I have only interviewed 4 freshmen students though tomorrow I intend to interview 2 seniors and a worker/senior Penn State student at McLanahan's. I've also found some quotes from Penn State's spokesman Bill Mahon, in the Daily Collegian, on the subject. My three favorite quotes I have were from 3 different students whose opinions varied greatly. The first student, Katie Meckler, fully supported the banning of shot glasses. The quote I chose from her is "I think it is a great idea that they banned them. School Spirit is not about taking as many shots as you can." The second quote is from Rachel Phares who disagrees with the banning of shot glasses. Her quote was "As soon as I saw in the Collegian that Penn State shot glasses were being banned I went down town to buy some. Honestly, drinking is part of Penn State so you have to have those shot glasses even if its just for memorabilia." My third quote is from Chris Behr who is strongly apposed to the shot glasses being banned and does not see how it will help Penn State's reputation. His quote is "I think that it is kind of ridiculous that Penn State thinks that if they ban the Penn State logo shot glasses that they will eliminate students desire to drink. I guess its an effort to silence alumni saying that Penn State does nothing to combat student drinking."

Most of the facts I found were from the Collegian. It was difficult to find facts online because most websites just contained negative feedback on the decision. Though the opinions from some of these sites were interesting and I've noted them to possibly use in my paper. One fact I found from a Collegian article was about the specifics on what exactly was banned from the shot glasses. "University logos include: the university seal, the Nittany Lion Shrine, the mascot, the university identity mark, the Intercolligate Athletics logo and Pride of the Lion designs, according to the Penn State licensing program's website." Another fact I found from this article was "the Penn State logo policy states that non references to drugs, alcohol or tobacco-related products may be used in conjunction with university symbols." This article can be found at http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2010/11/01/shots.aspx. I found another Collegian article which contained information on how students flooded to the Student Bookstore the Monday it was announced that the shot glasses were being banned. "One male student came in and bought $85 dollars worth of shot glasses." http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2010/11/02/shots_folo.aspx. I found a third article from the Collegian that talked about the reaction of Big Ten schools to the shot glass ban. The main fact I found here was that under this new policy Penn State logos can still be on beverage containers such as beer mugs and flasks because they can hold other liquids besides alcohol http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2010/11/03/shots_folo.aspx.

While interviewing students and reading articles the two most interesting thing I came across were the opinions of other schools and if question; is this really effective or will Penn State students ignore it and drink just as much? I intend to continue looking on online forums and other school newspapers along with interviewing some students from other schools to hear their opinions on the ban. I want to know if they feel like they are losing collectible opportunities and if they think Penn State is over reacting with this ban. I also intend to ask Penn State students if they believe that this ban will effect Penn State's drinking habits at all. I also intend to quote some websites I've found which have very negative feedback on this ban and state how they don't believe this will change Penn State in the slightest.

Journal 4

The first question in "What makes it an Investigative Report?" is; does the writer define the issue in terms that will make sense to the audience for the report? In the "#1 Party School" broadcast I felt that the issue was clearly defined in the opening scene by showing how drunk college students can be disrupting and damaging to people who live near the campus. This led into the main conflict of how drinking at Penn State can effect its students and the people who live in the area.

The second question is "What reasons are given for why the issue needs to be investigated immediately?" There were several reasons given. The first was that the drunken college kids damaged personal property and disturbed people's sleep. This then led to more serious problems like kids breaking into people's houses to find a comfortable place to sleep, fake I.D.'s, acceptable underage drinking and assaulting police officers due to the effect of alcohol. Finally they finished the reasons with most important reason which was that alcohol can result in death or injury for students.

The third question is "Are facts and details given to explain how the issue affects different groups that might have an interest in or connection to the issue?" Facts are presented in the forms of eye witness accounts through out the documentary. For example talking to people who have seen others pee in their yard along with going into a frat to see the environment and activities that take place in one. Also the documentary uses Dado's death as an example of how alcohol can injure student.

"Whom does the writer quote? Whose perspectives are represented in direct quotations? Whose perspectives are not represented through the use of quotations?" This documentary was heard from a large array of view points. People's whose perspectives were actually heard consisted of, a women who lived in University Park, a police officer from Penn State, various Penn State students going out to party and the friends of Dado. Various quotes from Graham Spanier's speeches on alcohol related problems at Penn State were also used. Student perspectives on the alcohol situation however were generalized. The document made it seem as if all Penn State students found drinking acceptable and did not want it to end on campus.

"What specific conclusion about the issue does the writer want readers to reach?" The main conclusion I felt was the fact that something had to be done about the drinking and partying that happens at Penn State because it is harmful. However the document acknowledged the fact that this was easier said then done because various steps which had been taken in the past to change the drinking habits of Penn State students weren't very effective.

I personally enjoyed the beginning of this broadcast because it was interesting for me to hear other people's perspectives on Penn State college students and their behaviors. Up until listening to this broadcast I had gotten so used to seeing some of the things downtown that I just accepted them as normal behavior until I heard them talked about. The progression of seriousness in this broadcast I felt was effective. It didn't start out immediately by saying drinking was bad and should be ended. It was taken from multiple perspectives, some saying the behaviors alcohol had caused was unacceptable while others talked about how they were glad that the students could have fun during thier free time. Mostly, I enjoyed listening to the cop talk and hearing his story and how he had to deal with Penn State students.