"The ad was written in a style that seemed as though it sought solely to aggravate our readers, and we didn't feel comfortable running it unedited," said Crimson President C. Matthew MacInnis '02. "Horowitz' advertisement was largely editorial in content and as such he is welcome to submit his piece as an editorial submission where it would be subject to the same standards of editing and fact-checking as our other editorial pieces."

On March 16, a coalition of students stole nearly all the papers of a Brown Daily Herald press run from campus distribution centers in response to the Daily Herald's publication of the ad, drawing fierce criticism from commentators in the national media. The qualified criticism of the protestors by Brown University officials served to further fan the flames.

The Crimson editorial board added its criticism of Brown on March 23, arguing that while the ad may have been offensive, it did not justify the theft of newspapers.

Meanwhile, Horowitz began a campaign against The Crimson for refusing to publish the ad. He submitted a new ad on March 2 entitled "What Harvard Can't Read."

"Even in the dark days of the McCarthy era, Communists could buy ad space in the Harvard Crimson," the ad read. "How did we get here? And where are we headed?"

The Crimson did not publish the ad, again inviting Horowitz to submit an editorial piece.

Postcards supplied to Horowitz supporters by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture have been flooding The Crimson in recent weeks. MacInnis says he has received nearly 2,000.

On Apr. 2 Horowitz spoke at Boston University on affirmative action and other topics. In contrast to the small crowd he drew at Harvard in February, over 200 people had to be turned away from the BU auditorium.

Can the Juice

And controversy soon beset The Crimson once again.

Fifteen Minutes, the weekend magazine of The Crimson, printed an endpaper-a personalized opinion piece-by Justin G. "Juice" Fong '03, on March 15, entitled "The Invasian." The piece bombastically criticized what Fong considered the self-segregating tendencies of Asian Harvard students, often resorting to what many readers saw as crude negative stereotypes.

The article drew scores of angry letters to the editor of The Crimson-over 60 in just three days. Fong himself received about 90 e-mails on the day "The Invasian" ran, most of which he said were critical.

Members of the Asian American Association (AAA0) held a discussion forum the day after the piece ran to consider their options and decided to plan a protest march and rally.

Amid calls for an apology, The Crimson printed a statement by four executives on March 19. The statement, printed on the Editorial page as an opinion piece, said that endpapers are not edited for content and style and emphasized that the views contained within Fong's piece were solely his.