"According to former President Derek Bok, 'we have been saved much of the hostile race-relations climate reported on other University campuses largely because of the work of the Harvard Foundation."

We have? See above

"The dogma of the Crimson group's challenge to the Foundation appears to be 'if you are not serving my special interest, then what good are you?'...Invariably, some groups will feel that we are not doing enough for them or that some of our programs are in conflict with their interests. For example, The Crimson frequently cites the Harvard-Radcliffe Hillel...as one of the student groups that is dissatisfied with the Foundation's work...The Crimson group, however, failed to point our that the frequently quoted student leader of Hillel is on the student advisory board of the Harvard Foundation."

Again, what do they think is The crimson's "special interest"? Counter and Reid suggest that we are a mouthpiece for Hillel, always driven to support the "interests" of Jews. But our only interest with regard to race relations at Harvard is in building a campus where diversity does not cause friction.

And aside from mentioning the Jeffries incident, Counter and Reid ignore The Crimson's coverage of minority and race issues. This year we have covered the Institute of Politics' invitation to David Duke, the problems of internationalizing the University, the Reserve Officers Training Corps' ban on gays, the problems of Cambridge's immigrants, hate crimes in Cambridge, the lack of diversity in Cambridge public schools and a host of other stories affecting all minorities on campus.

Furthermore, suggesting that our diversity series quoted Hillel members more frequently than others is simply false. And, in point of fact, we did identify Shai A. Held '94 as a student who works at the Harvard Foundation.

"Further, it should be pointed out that from its very inception, the Harvard Foundation has reached out to Hillel students, initially to be told that its members were White and not a minority group."

Wrong again. Rabbi Ben-Zion Gold, the director emeritus of Hillel who has been at Harvard since 1958, said on Sunday, "At no time were we approached [by the Foundation], either in writing or in conversation."

"It is of some interest that the Crimson group would choose to do a feature article on diversity and not cover its own status with regard to staff members of different racial cultural and religious backgrounds.

It is of some interest that, once again, Counter and Reid get their facts absolutely wrong. In our series on diversity at Harvard, former crimson president Rebecca L. Walkowitz '92 spoke extensively about the newspaper's recruitment efforts, calling the paper's relative lack of Blacks women and openly gay staffers an important problem. For year, The Crimson has had serious difficulties in attracting minority writers. The problem is a constant subject of discussion in our organization and a constant source of deep concern. We honestly feel that The Crimson provides a welcoming atmosphere to people of all races, and we work hard to ensure that this is the case. Our comp is open to all undergraduates who choose to walk through our doors.

Yet the problem persists. It's getting better--this year our business manager, our design editor, our sports editor and both our managing editors are members of non-Jewish minority groups. But we still have trouble recruiting minorities to comp.

We know we do our best to cover minority issues sensitively and objectively. We'll continue our efforts to attract minorities to The Crimson, but we're honestly not sure what more we can do. We urge members of minority groups who share our concern about racial imbalance on the crimson staff to do something about it by camping themselves. If more women, people of color and openly gay students join us, others may feel comfortable joining us in the future.

IN CLOSING, WE are most stunned that Counter and Reid's carefully phrased attack--which may be read as anti-Semitic by some--and their distortion of the truth have allowed them to charge The Crimson with a pro-Jewish (and, it seems, anti-Black) "racial agenda."

Quite simply, this is false. We think it at the least "insensitive" of Counter and Reid to suggest that because some of The Crimson's editors are "active in Hillel" (read: Jewish), the paper does not oppose the anti-Black sentiments of such people as Michael Levin and ignores pro-Foundation sentiment on campus.

Not only are Counter and Reid consistently inaccurate; they are also highly offensive. By suggesting that the Crimson has a pro-Jewish "racial agenda" and, more troubling, by intimating that a pro-Jewish agenda necessarily implies an anti-Black agenda, they are being insensitive. It makes us wonder how well the Foundation's leaders are equipped to carry out the University's mandate on issues of difference: to improve the climate of relations among all students on a diverse campus.

As the administrative leader of the Harvard Foundation, S. Allen Counter can have a tremendous effect on the level of sensitivity on campus. Unless Counter retracts what seems to be gross insensitivity on racial and ethnic issues--and does it quickly--he should not be in charge of intercultural and race relations at Harvard.