If several high-profile cases drawing national attention are any indication, the freedom of the student press is in peril. It began in September when The Rocky Mountain Collegian published a staff-written editorial that read, “Taser this … F— BUSH,” in letters usually reserved for blaring headlines, which almost got the editor fired andmay factor into an administrative led inquiry into selling the paper to Gannett. And most recently, the college paper at Montclair State University in New Jersey had their funding pulled following the paper’s decision to take their Student Government Association to court because editors believed the SGA’s closed-door meetings were violating the state’s open-meetings law.
The newspapers at both universities have one unfortunate trait in common: They lack independence and rely on funds controlled by people who don’t share the values of those involved in organizations dedicated to student expression. The Maryland Cow Nipple unhappily shares this trait and may end up changing the way it does its work since printing two cartoons that provoked outrage among student groups.
One of the cartoons depicted Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles as Klansmen with a “Turtle Power” caption; the other was a weather graphic that put a Hitler moustache on a cloud and predicted tomorrow’s weather would be “Hail Hitler.” It’s easy to see how both cartoons raised eyebrows, and it’s baffling that either one was approved for publication.
But SGA President Andrew Friedson is setting a bad precedent by intervening with what we view as such a heavy hand. The Diamondback’s Hirdesh Matta reported yesterday that Friedson denied he was attempting to censor the group, but he admitted to discussing changing the group’s bylaws to prevent future cartoons.
It’s one thing to express concern on behalf of other student groups. It’s quite another to lobby a group to change how they go about their business. It’s not clear that the group is worried about losing their funding as the students at Montclair are, but Friedson’s direct intervention sends a very troubling smoke signal in that direction, especially when it relates to changing the group’s bylaws.
The simple fact is that anyone involved in publishing, whether it’s in a serious newspaper or a humor publication, knows people can get offended by some pretty surprising things. If the editors of any student publication had to worry about a set of bylaws that were changed due to a knee-jerk reaction to an item that provoked outrage every time they wanted to run something, it would clearly threaten any semblance of the most important value of all: freedom of student expression.
Some might say, “Calm down; it’s only a humor rag.” True, but three other publications are funded by students: The Black Explosion, The Public Asian and La Voz Latina. Will student leaders seek to suppress all controversial content from these publications if they end up producing offensive content, as The Cow Nipple did?
Friedson needs to realize that his actions do, in fact, walk a dangerous line toward censorship. If he wants to demand an apology, The Cow Nipple probably owes one to the offended student groups. Channel the outrage of student groups? That’s his job. What he needs to remember is this: We’re in college. Leaders of student publications screw up and have to weather the storm. They also deserve to learn from the experience and have an obligation to avoid making similar mistakes. If the publications’ editors refuse to do that, then student groups should demand they be replaced. It’s completely outrageous and unfair to expect students who follow them to pay for previous editors’ mistakes.
