Freedom of Speech at Colorado State University (and Elsewhere)

David McSwane, editor of The Rocky Mountain Collegian, the student newspaper at Colorado State University, is currently under disciplinary review for publishing a column which consisted of four words: “Taser this: F**k Bush.” The review will determine whether McSwane should be punished, including the possibility of dismissal from the paper. As you’d probably expect, there have been both complaints about the column—more than 300 emails sent to the board reviewing the case, according to a CNN.com article—and concerns that any disciplinary response would constitute a violation of McSwane’s right to free speech—a petition supporting McSwane with over 700 signatures, according to the same article.

This sort of thing always gets under my skin because I believe in freedom of expression. I’m convinced every American, indeed every human being, has the right to say anything and everything he pleases, no matter how offensive it might be to anyone else. There are absolutely no exceptions to this rule. These cases get me so worked up because of the limitations people want to put on this freedom. They seem to think it is merely about words said or written, but I believe it goes much further.

In this case, the 700 students who signed that petition contend that if McSwane is disciplined, free speech will have been curtailed. They are wrong. In fact, whatever the outcome, free expression will be upheld.

The Board of Communications, which is conducting the disciplinary review, has the right and the authority to express its opinion on the matter with both words and actions—either dismissing or retaining McSwane. The businesses which have supported the Collegian have the right to express themselves by continuing to advertise there or by placing their ads elsewhere.

Simply put, McSwane has the right to say “F**k you” to anyone he wishes, but the board has the right to say, “Not in our paper,” and the advertisers have the right to say, “Not with our money.”

Personally, I hope they fire McSwane. Soon. Not because of the content of his statement—it takes a lot more than that to offend me—but because of his lack of professionalism and discipline. I suppose it's possible he is simply too dim to have grasped what the consequences of this action would be, but I rather doubt that. You don’t become the editor-in-chief of a large university newspaper without at least a moderate intellect.

McSwane knew this would be inflammatory, knew it would cause a stir, and knew advertisers would be lost. He did it anyway. Never mind that his fellow students would lose wages (as some have) because of the loss of advertising revenue. Never mind that his fellow writers would lose publication opportunities because the loss of those ads would lead to fewer overall pages. He saw an opportunity to draw attention to himself and he took it. That kind of selfish disregard for one’s colleagues deserves a response, and I think firing is appropriate.

Life (Wednesdays on NBC)

Once in a while, a new TV show comes out that I really like. I'll think to myself, "I should tell people about it, talk it up, so it won't get cancelled like everything else I love." But I don't do it. I figure, hey, if the promo people on network TV can't get you to watch, I probably can't either, and I don't want to sound like one of those sad sacks who build their lives around TV. Then, my favorite shows fail to get ratings, end up cancelled, and I'm disappointed again that America just can't manage to appreciate quality programming.

This time, I'm speaking up. I just watched the pilot episode of Life on NBC, and I was very impressed. The short set up is this: Charlie Crews was a beat cop in the early 1990's but was framed for murder in 1995 and spent 12 years in prison. Because he was a cop and in danger from other prisoners, he spent most of that time in solitary. As a result, he's a little nutty. Now, he's been exonerated, and as part of the settlement against those who wrongly imprisoned him, he's been given the rank of detective and is back on the job.

I don't tend to like cop shows these days, but I really liked this one. So this week, if you find yourself bored surfing the web or just flipping channels, jump on NBC.com and watch the pilot episode. If you don't like it, hey, you were just wasting time anyway. But if you do, you might just help keep something I like on the air for a change. I'd appreciate that.

http://www.nbc.com/

Madeleine L'Engle 1918-2007

I was introduced to Madeleine L'Engle in Mr. Hale's fourth grade class more than twenty years ago. I read A Wrinkle in Time, then its sequels A Wind in the Door and A Swiftly Tilting Planet. These are fantastic stories, in both the literary and evaluative senses of that word, and they are part of the great cloud of witnesses to the inexplicable which trained me up for faith in things not seen.

When I started writing fiction seriously, my Aunt Mavis gave me a copy of L'Engle's Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art. It is a work of deepest encouragement for both the believer and the writer, a demonstration that creativity is profound evidence for the sustained image of God in humanity. I return to it often, and it reminds me that playing make believe has the power to bring me, like a little child, closer to the Kingdom of God.

It makes me sad to think she's gone, that the works we have from her are all there will be and that I'll never have the chance to speak to her face to face. I realize, however, that this is foolishness. She left more work than I could ever properly absorb, and on each of those pages she is there for me to meet, to fellowship with, and learn from. For this, I am thankful.

http://www.madeleinelengle.com/