A brief editorial that ran in a student-run newspaper at Colorado State University is drawing controversy over the issue of student press rights. Some AU students expressed support for the CSU newspaper's free speech, while others questioned the extent of this freedom.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian's Sept. 21 editorial, titled "Taser This: Fuck Bush," was written in response to a Sept. 17 incident in which a University of Florida student was subdued with a taser gun by police after he disrupted a John Kerry speech and refused to leave, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported.
J. David McSwane, the Collegian's editor, told The Chronicle the editorial decision was approved by a split vote of the newspaper's seven-member board.
The university could not legally punish the editors or censor the editorial as it's a public university funded partially by the government, said Mike Hiestand, attorney and legal consultant for the Student Press Law Center, an organization that advocates and provides legal support for student free-press rights. Free press without university oversight is guaranteed in government-owned or funded institutions.
However, the Collegian did lose an estimated $30,000 in advertising revenue, The Chronicle reported.
One AU student said he was surprised at the backlash over the editorial.
"Isn't that the point of a free press, to say what we want?" said Peter Thai, a graduate student in the School of Communication. "They weren't stating a fact; they were making an opinion."
Candace Ming, a senior in the School of Communication, said it's important to uphold free-speech rights, but this freedom doesn't always constitute a reasonable argument. The editorial's bluntness didn't make a strong point for protesting the Florida incident or disliking Bush, according to Ming.
"You should always back up your claims," Ming said.
Andrew Hu, a first-year graduate student in the School of Public Affairs, also said the editorial was careless despite the newspaper's right to print it.
"I don't think [the statement] helped, but the newspaper had the right to say it," Hu said.
Though public universities lack the authority to censor campus publications, private institutions like AU have considerable oversight over university-affiliated press on campus, Hiestand said. Private universities or colleges have the authority to decide what type of speech is permissible or not within their institution, specifically in their publications, he said. Independent publications at private universities are an exception.
Publications put out by AU have to serve the interests of the university and the university's constituents, said Linda McHugh, executive editor of American Today, a weekly newspaper published by the Office of the President.
Though American Today is subject to university oversight, McHugh said she has a lot of discretion on what topics American Today covers. Ultimately, there is no need to draw controversy in the newspaper's reporting, she said. American Today reports on university events, and its core readership is faculty, according to McHugh.
ATV, AU's independent, student-run television station, also has considerable leeway in the content it broadcasts, said Steven Dorsey, ATV's co-general manager and a junior in SOC. However, ATV can be censored by AU for advertising political candidates or promoting alcohol and alcohol vendors, he said.
In the 1990s, an ATV broadcast made threatening comments to President Bill Clinton, prompting an FBI investigation and legal trouble for the station, Dorsey said.
In such a case, AU can hold the students in charge accountable and can even bring JAMS charges, Dorsey said.
The Eagle operates independently of university oversight and funding.
However, Hiestand said he believes student press should be free from restriction regardless of whether the institution is public or private.
"If you can't have free speech on a college campus, where can you have it?" Hiestand said.
Free student press at all colleges is appealing, but private institutions also have rights, Hu said.
"I would like to see [unrestricted student press], but I can see where the private universities are coming from," Hu said.
Michael Anthony, a sophomore in the School of International Service, said censorship should be eased at all academic institutions.
"[Private universities] may have the right, but censorship is harmful in an academic environment," Anthony said.
The SPLC is working to ease restrictions at private institutions through advocacy and legal counsel, Hiestand said.
