The code requires that the university not deal with companies unwilling to adhere to the code. Does that mean if Penn State discovers Nike is making football uniforms or sneakers in sweatshops that Penn State athletes will no longer adorn their uniforms with the Nike swoosh?

Many other questions need to be answered before the Collegian Board of Opinion will see this effort as completely altruistic.

First, who will be responsible for enforcement and monitoring working conditions overseas, and ultimately, who will hold corporations responsible for their actions when they deny the charges?

In 1997 there were at least four specific reports about Nike labor practices in Vietnam, Indonesia and China. Reports stated that the multimillion dollar corporation exploits and abuses its factory workers. Nike has also been criticized for its child labor practices. After reports of 12-year-old girls working in Indonesian sweatshops more than 70 hours a week making Nike sneakers and the like, Nike became scrutinized and its practices were investigated.

Nike denies the reports of unfair labor practices, yet still launches full-force media campaigns to save its image. Nike denies "being aware" of any unfair labor practices and commits itself to investigating the issue.

Who's to say Penn State and other universities won't do the same when the time comes? What will happen when another incident of sweatshop labor arises in the industry and Nike denies it? Will Penn State implement its code and punish Nike? We hope it does, and we hope Penn State is not blinded by Nike's monetary contribution to this university.

The commitment the university is making to ensure fair labor practices within the corporations it affiliates itself with is commendable. However, it is questionable if the code of conduct will be successful in accomplishing its intent.