A student editor will defend students' actions that published slander about President George Bush, but could his lose job. Rocky Mountain Collegian at Colorado State University printed an editorial that referenced a University of Florida student who was shocked with a Taser after disrupting a forum featuring U.S. Sen. John Kerry.
"The four-word editorial stated only: "Taser this . . .. Fuck Bush."
The college newspaper editor, J. David McSwane defends his newspaper and is risking his job in the process. The Collegian, is a self-funded, student-run publication. Under state law, university officials are prohibited from censoring or regulating its content. CSU's Board of student Communications claims that the editorial violated student media policies.
The article was supposed to spark students thoughts about free speech; mission accomplished. The editorial did exactly what it was intended to do, make people think. However the editorial did not need to include profanity to accomplish its goals.
Editor defends actions
Story in Rocky Mountain News
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I have no problem with the way that article was written. He writes for the college paper so you can assume all the readers will be going to college, its not like any little kids will be reading it. The article served its purpose and got people to think.
The F word is not foreign to us, nor is freedom of speech, and especially public opinion. It's nice to hear that it raised a fuss, because like ryan noted, it "got people to think."
The four word editorial does not bother me as well. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and fredom of speech. I hear proanity almost every day, either at work or schools or with friends and I'm sure every other college student does to. Of course it will shock people but the student who wrote it probably wanted a reaction from people.
Published in Editor & Publisher
Treat Controversial College Editor Like A Student-- Not A Villain
Is embattled Colorado student editor David McSwane, who wrote that now-famous "F--- Bush" message, the new evil monster of college newspapering or the deprived First Amendment stalwart expressing his freedom of speech? Neither, he is a student trying to learn.
By Joe Strupp
NEW YORK (September 26, 2007) -- So is David McSwane the new evil monster of college newspapering abusing his rights in an effort to offend readers? Or is he the deprived First Amendment stalwart expressing his freedom of speech in defiance of censoring powers that be?
Neither, he is a college student. And it would seem he should be treated as such, someone in school to learn, and therefore, be taught that what he did was wrong and why.
Instead, as is often the case in recent years with controversial moves by campus press, he is treated like some horrible fiend misusing his power as an editor and flaunting the traditions of good journalism. When did this student rise to the level of expectations granted to veteran reporters and journalists who have been in the business for years?
For those who don’t know, McSwane is the editor of the Rocky Mountain Collegian, the student newspaper of Colorado State University. Last week, after the outcry over a student being tasered at a University of Florida event featuring John Kerry, McSwane published a four-word editorial, in big bold letters, that proclaimed "Taser This: F--- BUSH."
A powerful message? Yes. An offensive message? Yes. And I would agree an inappropriate message. But to simply fire this editor and treat him like a seasoned reporter who has been around a while, and should know better, is also inappropriate.
Numerous cases in recent years involving campus press, such as the University of Virginia cartoonist bounced for an Ethiopian cartoon considered offensive, seem to get lost in the quick demand to punish rather than teach. Should a senior in college be given the same scrutiny for a lapse in judgment that Dan Rather gets for using questionable documents in a report on the president?
Yes, what McSwane did was wrong. Not because such language is verboten in a college publication or that one should not criticize the president. But because it did not express its message clearly and went so far in offending readers that it overshadowed its apparent point.
Should McSwane be suspended or demoted? Perhaps. But someone should point out that it is not the offensive nature of the words, but how they were used, or misused, that draws punishment. Anyone with any editorial writing experience knows that if the point is unclear, and the message overshadowed by its approach, the editorial has failed.
In this case, McSwane did use the theory that "less is more." Unfortunately, that less was too little. The profanity, in my view, was a second issue and, because the overall message was unclear, it becomes irrelevant.
What is relevant, however, is how the situation is treated. And to simply kick this student off the newspaper and avoid using the situation to teach him, and other student reporters and editors how to proceed properly in their pages, is to miss a valuable opportunity.
Tonight, the university's Board of Student Communications is set to decide McSwane's fate. So far, the campus' College Republicans have called for his ouster, while McSwane has reportedly retained a lawyer to sue if he is let go.
Is this where we want simple college-level disputes to go? First, a student is fired for making a mistake in an atmosphere that is supposed to teach future journalists. Then, politics creeps in with a campus GOP group calling for a departure, and now another needless lawsuit may result.
In today's overly-sensationalistic climate of news where cable loudmouths spout off obnoxious comments regularly and tabloids splash every eye-grabbing offensive headline they can think of, is it a surprise a college editor might go that route for attention and to vent anger?
I am sure any of us who worked in a campus newspaper or other student publication can recall mistakes made. In my case, during my time at Brooklyn College, writing for two different newspapers and working at the college radio station, I goofed a few times myself.
Later, as a news and sports director at the radio station, I had at least two occasions when a reporter made a serious mistake and demands called for his or her firing. I resisted, discussed the matter, and allowed them to remain following lesser punishments and warnings. In both cases, they resumed duties problem-free.
I also spent a brief stint as a writing coach at San Francisco State University. After several sessions with a smart student who had good intentions but could not write well, I realized I was expecting too much of him right away. After holding back the initial heavy criticism, I took it slowly and remembered he was there to learn. After a few weeks, he caught on and showed marked improvement.
I know the news world is in a crazy state, with cutbacks aplenty, calls for reporters' anonymous sources growing and the Internet turning competition into a frenzied 24-hour marathon. But that is no excuse for neglecting the fact that college students, who will have to enter this demanding news world soon, need to be taught how to do their jobs, not punished for trying to learn to do them.
Joe Strupp (jstrupp@editorandpublisher.com) is a senior editor at E&P
I completely agree with you. Newspapers are always going to be held up to a higher standard because they are where the common person goes to get it's new, whether it's the Chronicle or the school newspaper. The use of profanity, especially in a headline is uncalled for and everyone involved should be reprimanded.
Even though the F word is offensive when used in any context I feel that it is not right that the reporter was fired. I feel that one of the main purposes for news is to get people to think. Freedom of speech allows us to express and get across our ideas without being punished for it. If we are then really what is the purpose of having the first amendment?
To some the "F" word is considered to be inappropriate. On the other hand, the CSU Collegian is a newspaper whose audience is college students. As a college student, I hear the "F" word on a daily basis. Sadly, I am desensitized to the word. Therefore, I think that the situation is being blown out of proportion! The Collegian does not receive money from student fees, and under the state law, university officials prohibit the censoring of content. Honestly, what is the problem? If anything, the article sparked conversation and made people think! Is that not one of the many purposes of media?
Journalists need to always keep their audience in mind. For a college newspaper, the audience is a younger generation and therefore generally less sensitive to profanities. I think the F word served its purpose: to evoke emotion. The title ignited debates accross the country about free speech and politics. I do not think any of the journalists or publiishers should loose their jobs over the article. Colleges are meant to foster young minds in a postive learning environment. If they are repremanded for printing the article, their creative and free spirit will be cut short. With all this national attention, I am sure the students learned their lesson about what is printable and acceptable to their audience!
I think that as a society we have become desensitized to foul language. I believe freedom of speech and of the press does not give you the right to print or say whatever you want. Its sad that people noticed the article not because the journalist took a firm stand against Bush and his policies but because he used an "F" word.
Post a Comment