The editor-in-chief of Colorado State University’s student newspaper the Rocky Mountain Collegian will not lose his job over a recent controversial editorial, a university committee decided Thursday.
Colorado State’s Board of Student Communications, made up of students and faculty, decided at a recent hearing not to fire J. David McSwane for printing a short but provocative editorial that read “TASER THIS ““ F— BUSH. This is the view of the Collegian editorial board.”
Since it ran, the message has sparked a nationwide dialogue about freedom of speech and the rights of college newspapers.
“Even though I think that it was in bad taste, it’s certainly their right to go ahead and express whatever views it is that they have,” said Arthur Lechtholz-Zey, chief executive officer of L.O.G.I.C. (Liberty, Objectivity, Greed, Individualism and Capitalism), a UCLA student group associated with the Ayn Rand Institute, which promotes objectivism and the value of philosophy in general.
“Certainly I don’t think anybody should be punished for this,” he added.
The Board of Student Communications at Colorado State is an independent group that oversees the newspaper, which relies on advertising rather than student fees for its funding.
The board’s primary goal during the hearing was to decide whether the use of an expletive violated the newspaper’s code of ethics, which includes the condition that “profane and vulgar words are not acceptable for opinion writing.”
The first half of the four-word editorial column refers to an incident a few weeks ago during which a University of Florida student fought with police officers as he was escorted out of an event, yelling out, “Don’t tase me, bro,” after which he was promptly shocked with a Taser and handcuffed.
The second half of the editorial does not refer to a specific incident but instead is a call for students to become more involved in politics and current events, according to McSwane, who refused to resign over the incident.
“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,” McSwane said in a statement.
But Ryan Dunn, a third-year law student at UCLA, said he does not believe the paper overstepped the boundaries of freedom of speech and the press, and does believe the paper was within their rights to publish the editorial..
“I think there’s obviously a limit (to freedom of speech). They need to be aware of what their words can cause,” Dunn said.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian has already lost a significant amount of revenue from advertisers pulling out.
Jeff Browne, director of student media at Colorado State, said in a statement the paper could lose up to $50,000. Neither the advertisers nor staff advisers were informed about the editorial before it was published, he added.
Advertisers and staff do not necessarily need to be informed of any decision a paper makes, but student journalists should consider seeking input about the repercussions when making potentially controversial decisions, said Amy Emmert, UCLA’s Student Media adviser.
“It’s not a requirement by any means (to let faculty advisers know what is going to be published) … but I do expect and hope that (students) would have good judgment and know when it’s appropriate to seek out my insight,” Emmert said.
Lechtholz-Zey said advertisers were well within their own freedom of speech rights to cancel any affiliation with the paper.
“I think it’s proper for people who don’t agree with the editorial to express their displeasure by withdrawing their financial support, whether it’s through advertising or other means,” he said.
Emmert said that while she believes McSwane should have been more aware of the financial ramifications of his decision, a paper should not be influenced by its advertisers.
“Whenever you publish something that’s politically controversial, you’re always running a risk with advertising. But it’d be unethical to let advertising influence your decision,” Emmert said.
Kyle Kleckner, president of Bruin Democrats at UCLA, said that though he believes freedom of speech was not necessarily abused on any side, the newspaper did a disservice to journalism in general.
“I don’t think they necessarily overstepped their bounds in terms of freedom of speech or freedom of the press, but I definitely believe they overstepped their bounds in peaceful writing, peaceful journalism and credible public discourse,” Kleckner said.
But he maintained that the staff of the Collegian still had the right to print their opinions, regardless of language.
“The editorial page is a place for opinions. I think they do have a right to publish (what they did). Whether or not it means that it’s in good taste or the best interest of the newspapers, that’s something that can be debated,” Kleckner said.
Dunn said he believes a well-written piece, as opposed to the terse statement, would have expressed the message in a clearer, more appropriate way.
“That’s the beauty of (writing). It’s an art as much as a science. You want to artfully express your opinion,” Dunn said.