Four words printed on the opinion page of Colorado State University's student newspaper just over a week ago sparked a national free speech debate and calls for the Editor in Chief David McSwane, to resign.
The editorial printed in The Rocky Mountain Collegian read, Taser this: FUCK BUSH,"" and underneath the caption informed readers, ""This column represents the views of the Collegian's Editorial Board.""
It was no surprise when the media preyed on the story like vultures; they love a good free speech controversy. Free speech is a topic that can pique the interest of the vast majority of people. After all, people are opinionated and often like to hear the sound of their own voice. Being able to speak freely about one's opinions is a subject that sparks the passions of many. It makes a great story if the media can martyr someone into a champion for the First Amendment.
I do not pretend that McSwane was a noble crusader for free speech. I doubt his sole intention was to be a champion for first amendment rights. He's probably just a guy irritated with the present leadership of our nation. I feel that. He's definitely not alone in that sentiment.
I also doubt he minded the subsequent attention he inevitably received when the editorial with the vulgur, four-letter word hit newsstands.
Perhaps McSwane's intention was a protest of the incident at the University of Florida when a student was tasered by police during a speech by Sen. John Kerry, igniting a free speech debate. Whether this was his intention or not, the incident became an issue of free speech, and either way the response to the editorial is troubling.
In general, I do not endorse vulgar editorials. I would like to think that students are capable of articulating critiques and sharp-tongued satire without resorting to four-letter words. Vulgarity simply for the sake of shock value is lazy journalism. Plus, editorials are meant to be the anchor of the newspaper, expressing the newspaper's opinion in a dignified and sophisticated manner.
Though I suspect sensationalism, not professionalism or activism, was the likely objective, I have to hand it to the guy; it did get people talking. Sparking a reaction in the readership can be an accomplishment depending on the context.
When McSwane interviewed with 7NEWS, a local Colorado news station, he said, ""We felt it illustrated our point about freedom of speech. I think we could write 250 words and ramble on and I don't think anyone would pay attention.""
The editorial did get the attention of the College Republicans on the CSU campus, prompting them to start a petition strongly urging McSwane to resign as editor in chief
The College Republicans can and should protest the sentiment to their hearts' content. Their freedom of speech provides them the right to do so.
But calling for McSwane's resignation because they do not agree with his opinion? Lame. It was an editorial on the opinion page, not a news piece. If they do not agree with the publication's message, they should not read it.
Somehow, I doubt if the story read ""Fuck Clinton,"" they would take such deep offense to the language choice. I doubt there would be a peep from the College Republicans.
Surprise, surprise: The College Democrats on campus have spoken out in support of McSwane's right for free speech. The reaction of the student groups just proved stereotypical and disappointing.
The editorial also prompted the campus Board of Student Communications to plan an Oct. 4 formal, closed-door hearing regarding McSwane's future with the publication. This is disconcerting.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian is an independently run student newspaper that is self-funded through advertising. They do not use student fees to run their publication. It is up to nobody but the staff of the Collegian as to whether David McSwane should continue his post as editor in chief.
The editorial was offensive to some, but calling for McSwane to resign for that simple fact is irrational. It is like saying it is acceptable to dissent and express one's opinion, as long as what one says does not offend anyone. People should not be persecuted for speaking their mind and exercising their right to free speech, whether it makes them sound like self-righteous morons or not.
Freedom of speech should not be used and enforced discriminately.
The fact that somebody saying ""FUCK BUSH"" in the newspaper is sparking such immense passion and controversy while atrocities reported on everyday are glanced over and tossed in the recycle bin is absurd and just plain disheartening.
Michelle Turcotte is a senior majoring in journalism. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com
