The right to say "[expletive deleted] Bush"?

[Che Guava]

Rhymes with 'pluck ...

College Daily’s Vulgarity Is Now Free-Speech Issue


On the campus of Colorado State University, opinion is divided over whether a terse editorial that ran in the student newspaper on Sept. 21 was an exercise of free speech or immature judgment.

The four-word message began with “Taser this” and added a four-letter expletive directed at President Bush, in a type size larger than most newspaper headlines. The message was “the view of The Collegian editorial board," the daily newspaper stated.

Editors at The Rocky Mountain Collegian were reacting to a Sept. 18 incident at the University of Florida, where a student had been hauled off by the police and shocked with a Taser gun after repeatedly asking questions at a forum featuring Senator John Kerry. The campus paper ran a news article on its front page that discussed free speech regulations on college campuses, as well as the disputed attack.

This week, a school supervisory board will decide whether to fire the editor in chief, J. David McSwane, over the decision to publish the four-word message.

The question of free speech quickly became political, with a campus group, the College Republicans, circulating a petition calling for Mr. McSwane’s resignation. Three days after the message ran, Mr. McSwane vowed that he would not resign. “We feel this statement, albeit unpopular, was necessary in communicating our opinion that it’s time college students challenge the current political climate and speak out,” he wrote in a letter to the public.

By then, the controversy was becoming national news. The president of Colorado State, with 22,000 students in Fort Collins, released a statement expressing disappointment about the editorial and referring the matter to the Board of Student Communications, an independent body that oversees the newspaper.

The board, composed of six students and three professors, held a well-attended public forum on Sept. 25 and subsequently decided that the community’s complaints had enough merit to call Mr. McSwane to a formal hearing, scheduled for Thursday. The board plans at the hearing to consider whether the language violated the newspaper’s code of ethics, specifically the provision that “profane and vulgar words are not acceptable for opinion writing.”

Until then, the participants are keeping quiet; neither Mr. McSwane nor any of the nine board members responded to interview requests.

Greg Luft, chairman of Colorado State’s journalism department, said every college newspaper in the country exhibits “occasional exuberance” on its pages. The editors are students who are learning journalism skills, he said, and “some editors do a fantastic, very mature job, and some need advice or professional guidance.”

Mr. McSwane has retained David Lane, a lawyer based in Denver, for advice about his First Amendment rights. Mr. Lane represented Mr. McSwane once before, when, at age 17, Mr. McSwane posed as a drug-addicted high school dropout to try to expose Army recruiting tactics in his high school paper.

link

So what do we think, folks? An excercise in free speech, or just plain immature vulgarity (or both)? Should the editor in chief of The Rocky Mountain Collegian be fired over this or not?

 

[George2816]

Yes of course!

 

[Elrohir]

Immature and unacceptable. (And irrelevant, besides - President Bush had nothing to do with that moron getting tasered)

he board, composed of six students and three professors, held a well-attended public forum on Sept. 25 and subsequently decided that the community’s complaints had enough merit to call Mr. McSwane to a formal hearing, scheduled for Thursday. The board plans at the hearing to consider whether the language violated the newspaper’s code of ethics, specifically the provision that “profane and vulgar words are not acceptable for opinion writing.”

Fire him. Can't live up to the paper's guidelines, go start your own.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I think it's both. It's immature and it's vulgar, but it's also an excercize of free speech. He shouldn't be fired, but by our wonderful labor laws, you don't need a reason to fire someone, so he could be fired because of it, but not for it, if you follow my meaning. They could claim it was because he tarnished the paper's reputation by using vulgar speech and fire him, and thus it's not really because of what he said, but what happened when he said it. Ah, technicalities.

 

[Arwon]

Sounds fine to me.

 

[azzaman333]

Ban swearing, and the terrorists have won.

 

[brainpan]

It's both. I don't think the kid owns the newspaper, so he doesn't have an unlimited right to . .. .. .. . on someone else's lawn. But if the court decides the speech is protected, and if the newspaper is ultimately owned by the government...well, that would change things too.

 

[downtown]

The guy's mistake was not knowing his audience. CSU isn't a bastion of the liberal...and that kind of stuff is going to alienate people who might advertise in the newspaper. Thats exactly what happened, and the newspaper had to cut back of payroll to make ends meet.

Its important that college newspapers are given high amounts of independence from their institution, so they have the necessary freedom to criticize the school, or report on unpopular matters (faculty/administration often have very different priorities than students). If there had been no profanity, and the newspaper was investigated, I would be very, very concerned.

But there was no need to say the F word to make their point. It was a foolish, immature decision, and one that's going to haunt him. If I worked for the newspaper, I wouldn't support him.

 

[Che Guava]

I guess I feel that as immature and silly as it was, its no reason to fire him. Drawing a line in the sand as to what is 'appropriate' and what isn't when it comes to freedom of speech just isnt a good idea in the end...

 

[skadistic]

This just like the idiot who got tazed are doing intentionally to cause a scene. I hope this moron goes on to try and be a journalist and gets no job in a legit news organization.


With rights comes responsibility. With actions comes consequences.

 

[History_Buff]

Free speech, though he'll probably get hit on the vulgar code. Our newspaper editor once got fired for writing "And he came into her, and it was good."

But there's no reason you shouldn't be able to put explitives in front of the president's name. When Rhymes-With-Pluck turns into Kill, then you've crossed the line.

 

[Phlegmak]

So what do we think, folks? An excercise in free speech, or just plain immature vulgarity (or both)?

Both.

Should the editor in chief of The Rocky Mountain Collegian be fired over this or not?

Not.

 

[Bill3000]

My local college newspaper did the same type of thing, though it was about funding something or other and a picture of a penis. I don't remember the specifics, though I do remember being interviewed by the local paper for my reaction.

With that said, let the market decide.

 

[Ansar]

The editor, though being immature, doesn't deserve to be fired.

 

[El_Machinae]

If it's against policy to use expletives, then I guess that attempt at expression crossed the line.

 

[downtown]

Does he deserve to be fired if this article scares away advertisers, and the newspaper loses money/jobs?

 

[GinandTonic]

If you cant say *%&$ the president, it is a sorry excuse for a university rag.

They are within their power to fire the guy, but it misses the point of a uni paper to do so.

 

[Atlas14]

I don't think professional/academic newspapers need trash talk in their product, and if the guy broke a rule, then he deserves to be fired.

I don't like some of my professors, but I know cursing at them will bring consequences. This guy knew the consequences.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Free speech, crude, but don't fire him. Although, if the newspaper starts losing sponsors, they're in trouble.

 

[Japanrocks12]

I have this to say.


[expletive deleted] Bush!