BSC to decide on editoral
Abstract:
After a four-word editorial that read "Taser this… F*** Bush" made national headlines and prompted some CSU students to demand his resignation, Collegian Editor in Chief J. David McSwane will find out if he gets to keep his job tonight.
The Board of Student Communications (BSC) will hold a formal hearing for McSwane to discuss complaints issued against him in regards to the controversial Collegian editorial published September 21....
- Displaying 1 - 15 of 15
T Brannon
posted 10/04/07 @ 7:04 AM MST
Everyone is entitled to free speech. However, that freedom comes with consequences, some good and some bad. Both types need to be accepted. Afterall, you have the freedom to yell fire in a croweded hall but need to be willing to accept all consequences that come with it.
The editorial was seen by most of the nation as unprofessional. If you don't respect a person in an office you should still respect the office. Some people thought it was fine and supported the editorial. Those are also our freedoms.
The consequenses are those that felt strongly against the editorial pulled advertising dollars, quit reading the paper, bad mouthed the university and might not enroll future students. Those that supported the editorial voiced thier opinions in writing and verbally. I do not believe advertising dollars went increased or everyone received a pay raise for a great job.
Therefore, the real decision before the board tonight will be can we live with these consequences or should we cut our liabilities and try to recover to where we were before the editiorial.
Freedom of speech was heard. Freedom of the press was upheld. Now its a business decision to deal with all the consequences. It's that simple. If a job is lost, it's not a blow for freedoms and and american rights. It's not slamming the Constitution. It's just a plain business decision.
Personally, I would perfer that the next edition has a classified for a new editor. That doesn't mean I don't support his freedom of speech. It means I didn't like what I heard and have exercised my freedom of speech in this reply.
I also encourage other to exercise there freedom of speech and continue to show your support (purchase more advertising in the paper) or lack of support (put those advertising dollars elsewhere) based on tonights decision.
The editorial was seen by most of the nation as unprofessional. If you don't respect a person in an office you should still respect the office. Some people thought it was fine and supported the editorial. Those are also our freedoms.
The consequenses are those that felt strongly against the editorial pulled advertising dollars, quit reading the paper, bad mouthed the university and might not enroll future students. Those that supported the editorial voiced thier opinions in writing and verbally. I do not believe advertising dollars went increased or everyone received a pay raise for a great job.
Therefore, the real decision before the board tonight will be can we live with these consequences or should we cut our liabilities and try to recover to where we were before the editiorial.
Freedom of speech was heard. Freedom of the press was upheld. Now its a business decision to deal with all the consequences. It's that simple. If a job is lost, it's not a blow for freedoms and and american rights. It's not slamming the Constitution. It's just a plain business decision.
Personally, I would perfer that the next edition has a classified for a new editor. That doesn't mean I don't support his freedom of speech. It means I didn't like what I heard and have exercised my freedom of speech in this reply.
I also encourage other to exercise there freedom of speech and continue to show your support (purchase more advertising in the paper) or lack of support (put those advertising dollars elsewhere) based on tonights decision.
John B
posted 10/04/07 @ 6:56 AM MST
A huge blow to free speech, eh? How about a grand statement from the BSC toward decency and civility in the public forum. No matter how many times they try to slice this, this "editorial" was never about free speech. The child McSwane who has a well established record of causing public uproar needs a hard lesson in proper decorum, one that his mom never taught him. If the BSC punts on this, you should expect more obscenity passed off as "free speech" from liberal college campuses.
This does not go unnoticed in the workplace, by the way. I am the chief engineer at a small engineering firm, and we will certainly do our due diligence with any prospective candidate on how he/she spent time on the CSU campus. Anyone participating in this type of obscenity would become a liability to us, so we would suggest they move on to the NYT or LAT for future employment.
This does not go unnoticed in the workplace, by the way. I am the chief engineer at a small engineering firm, and we will certainly do our due diligence with any prospective candidate on how he/she spent time on the CSU campus. Anyone participating in this type of obscenity would become a liability to us, so we would suggest they move on to the NYT or LAT for future employment.
Kris HIte
posted 10/04/07 @ 7:39 PM MST
You Sir are a gleaming example of all that is wrong with our country. People like you are the reason companies like Blackwater are allowed to exist. Good citizenry comes before good business always. We can disagree with each other but neither you nor I have the right to silence each other. Only through discussion can the reds and the blues get over themselves and make this country work once again.
I wish you peace and hope that through the disgust you feel with this editorial you might be able to imagine being in my shoes, feeling that same disgust I feel each time I think about the war in Iraq and how my best friend will remain there for the next 14 months until the divine right of kings is overthrown by democracy in 2008.
I wish you peace and hope that through the disgust you feel with this editorial you might be able to imagine being in my shoes, feeling that same disgust I feel each time I think about the war in Iraq and how my best friend will remain there for the next 14 months until the divine right of kings is overthrown by democracy in 2008.
Originally posted byJohn B
A huge blow to free speech, eh? How about a grand statement from the BSC toward decency and civility in the public forum. No matter how many times they try to slice this, this "editorial" was never about free speech. The child McSwane who has a well established record of causing public uproar needs a hard lesson in proper decorum, one that his mom never taught him. If the BSC punts on this, you should expect more obscenity passed off as "free speech" from liberal college campuses.
This does not go unnoticed in the workplace, by the way. I am the chief engineer at a small engineering firm, and we will certainly do our due diligence with any prospective candidate on how he/she spent time on the CSU campus. Anyone participating in this type of obscenity would become a liability to us, so we would suggest they move on to the NYT or LAT for future employment.
Craig Hawley
posted 10/04/07 @ 8:19 PM MST
I am a Veteran and was curious. First of all I commend your friends service and sacrifice. But I must ask the obvious question. Your colorful comments on kings aside , did your friend volunteer for military service. If he didn't then yor point could be considered. But if he volunteered you don't get to join and then take advantage of a job , place to live if you can't budget your money wisely and live off base, and a paycheck , and then pick and choose what wars and orders you feel like obeying. If you volunteer this is made painfully clear to you before you swear in. So if your in and you don't like it then get out after your tours are done and then become a peace activist or what ever else you wish. But until then do your duty and be a man or woman of integrity that honors commitments they made.
I also voluteere for Iraq and would be there right now i they hadn't told me was to old. The difference is I would not be whining about it after the fact like i was drafted or something. Life has consequences for ones actions much like it does for ones speech. This should point out to be careful in making decisions because you will have to live with the consequences.
I also voluteere for Iraq and would be there right now i they hadn't told me was to old. The difference is I would not be whining about it after the fact like i was drafted or something. Life has consequences for ones actions much like it does for ones speech. This should point out to be careful in making decisions because you will have to live with the consequences.
Originally posted byJohn B
A huge blow to free speech, eh? How about a grand statement from the BSC toward decency and civility in the public forum. No matter how many times they try to slice this, this "editorial" was never about free speech. The child McSwane who has a well established record of causing public uproar needs a hard lesson in proper decorum, one that his mom never taught him. If the BSC punts on this, you should expect more obscenity passed off as "free speech" from liberal college campuses.
This does not go unnoticed in the workplace, by the way. I am the chief engineer at a small engineering firm, and we will certainly do our due diligence with any prospective candidate on how he/she spent time on the CSU campus. Anyone participating in this type of obscenity would become a liability to us, so we would suggest they move on to the NYT or LAT for future employment.
Craig Hawley
posted 10/04/07 @ 7:21 AM MST
This is hilarious. The free speech campus at CSU is not allowing to public to view the hearing. What are you hiding? You take tax dollars from citizens and then lock them out of your secret hearing. Maybe Colorado residents should with hold taxes until you have a more transparent and accountable process.
If the board is not ashamed of the article or it's process for dealing with it then it should open the process to public viewing and debate. With Ms. Loucks coming out and saying she was misrepresented by the paper , why should we trust the paper to hold a fair hearing.
I was glad to see your President Larry Penley say that by law McSwane had the right to say what he did ( something no one is disputing ) , but that he must accept responsibility for those words. Imagine that the President of your University agreeing with little ole me. The president is right. We who hold McSwane accountable for his childish outburst are right , and those of you who support McSwanes tirade are wrong.
Your support of McSwane is actually a dis-service to McSwane. It supports his mistake and makes him think he is some kind of hero instead of a petulant child. He will go out in to the real world and it will crush him. He can not act this way out here , and get away with it. The sooner he learns this lesson the happier his life will be.
If the board is not ashamed of the article or it's process for dealing with it then it should open the process to public viewing and debate. With Ms. Loucks coming out and saying she was misrepresented by the paper , why should we trust the paper to hold a fair hearing.
I was glad to see your President Larry Penley say that by law McSwane had the right to say what he did ( something no one is disputing ) , but that he must accept responsibility for those words. Imagine that the President of your University agreeing with little ole me. The president is right. We who hold McSwane accountable for his childish outburst are right , and those of you who support McSwanes tirade are wrong.
Your support of McSwane is actually a dis-service to McSwane. It supports his mistake and makes him think he is some kind of hero instead of a petulant child. He will go out in to the real world and it will crush him. He can not act this way out here , and get away with it. The sooner he learns this lesson the happier his life will be.
Chris O
posted 10/04/07 @ 8:53 AM MST
The editor in chief is wrong by saying this is a civil rights issue. He can go out on the Plaza and scream Fuck Bush all he wants but he was using a paper and an entity to spread his opinion, which isn't protected. You have no RIGHT to the access of a newspaper to scream your opinions to.
John S
posted 10/04/07 @ 9:51 AM MST
I admit, Conlaw wasn't my interest in law school, nor is it my strength. Therefore, from a legal perspective I will not judge whether McSwane has a free speech argument. And quite frankly, I don't think it is necessary. What about editorial responsibilities? Is "F Bush" a responsible way to express your opinion as a representative of a media outlet? Is it a mature way? Does anyone think McSwane expressed himself intelligently? The bottom line is that although McSwane got his 15 minutes of fame, which he obviously wants, in 5 years McSwane will look upon his statement with embarrassment. I'm sure the University already does. But I don't want to bash McSwane; after all, I remember when I was in undergrad. What I do want to convey is that if the University cannot control similar immature outbursts, then it's on them.
Megan F
posted 10/04/07 @ 10:36 AM MST
Free speech squandered by idiocy. This "editorial" has got to be the dumbest stand for free speech I have ever seen. This kind of thing has no place in intelligent media. Hate Bush INTELLIGENTLY, don't act like bratty teenagers. This is rubbish.
Jeanne B
posted 10/04/07 @ 10:50 AM MST
McSwane should be fired. It has nothing to do with free speech. It has everything to do with:
a) it was in violation of the Collegian's bylaws
b) it was a bad business decision for the Collegian
c) it was unethical
The first amendment is just a wall that McSwane is cowering behind.
a) it was in violation of the Collegian's bylaws
b) it was a bad business decision for the Collegian
c) it was unethical
The first amendment is just a wall that McSwane is cowering behind.
LJP
posted 10/04/07 @ 11:12 AM MST
I agree with Jeanne B on this one. McSwayne definitely has a right to discuss the issues or opinions of those on campus and things going on nationalyl and their effect on us. As for freedom of speech, it's respecting the reader as well. Many people are offended by course language, but no one is offended by a fact or opinion stated in respectable terms. As a state university editor myself, I feel very strongly that this will not effect college papers' freedom to speak their minds. Indeed it is their right, and duty. However, it could have been stated differently if there is a broader vocabulary there.
toni
posted 10/04/07 @ 12:22 PM MST
Retain your editor in cheif!!!!!!!
I am a mother of two alumni Please do the right thing and retain your editor in chief and everyone else. I suspect this firestorm is more than enough punishment. Please Please don't let us down. Free speech for journalists is a must even when it goes over the top.
I am a mother of two alumni Please do the right thing and retain your editor in chief and everyone else. I suspect this firestorm is more than enough punishment. Please Please don't let us down. Free speech for journalists is a must even when it goes over the top.
Craig Hawley
posted 10/04/07 @ 12:46 PM MST
Toni at the risk of sounding like I am chiding you , no one has or ever was saying a thing about free speech. Find one anti McSwane letter that says McSwane has no right to say F Bush. You can't find a single one , because that is not what any one said.
So please please, using your vernacular stop bringing up free speech in an discussion where it is not part of the dialogue.
If what you mean to say that speech has no consequences then your wrong and trampling on my rights.
It is just like when I was on TV on the Larry Elder show. There was a lady during the last election that worked in a private company and hated Bush. She put up signs in her car stating that. Her employer was a Bush supporter and because of the Bush tax cuts had enough money to get a forklift , expand his business and hire 3 more employees. He told the lady that while on his property her signs would come down or she could park off the property. She did not sink as low as McSwane and tell him to F off , but she refused and her boss fired her.
This to was picked up by Liberals and the media as violating her free speech rights. John Kerry got a hold of the story and came to this ladies rescue ( used her ) and gave her a job on his campaign. I was in Los Angeles , land of the Liberal , and they flew the lady out here on TV to have her and I debate. I won that debate because it was not a free speech issue. IT was a private property issue. The employer had the right to make his employees wear Mickey Mouse shirts on his private land if he wanted. The lady was stubborn , unyielding ( gee sort of like McSwane and his supporters ) and it cost her the job she had.
By the way I said then I felt sorry for her. Does she still work for John Kerry. Of course not. So McSwane better choose his actions more carefully and his friends because if he is fired the people supporting him here won't give him a job and in a few weeks when he sinks back into obscurity they will abandon him.
So Please Please Toni save your righteous indignation and first amendment arguments for a conversation where some on is actually saying " YOU CAN'T SAY THAT ".
So please please, using your vernacular stop bringing up free speech in an discussion where it is not part of the dialogue.
If what you mean to say that speech has no consequences then your wrong and trampling on my rights.
It is just like when I was on TV on the Larry Elder show. There was a lady during the last election that worked in a private company and hated Bush. She put up signs in her car stating that. Her employer was a Bush supporter and because of the Bush tax cuts had enough money to get a forklift , expand his business and hire 3 more employees. He told the lady that while on his property her signs would come down or she could park off the property. She did not sink as low as McSwane and tell him to F off , but she refused and her boss fired her.
This to was picked up by Liberals and the media as violating her free speech rights. John Kerry got a hold of the story and came to this ladies rescue ( used her ) and gave her a job on his campaign. I was in Los Angeles , land of the Liberal , and they flew the lady out here on TV to have her and I debate. I won that debate because it was not a free speech issue. IT was a private property issue. The employer had the right to make his employees wear Mickey Mouse shirts on his private land if he wanted. The lady was stubborn , unyielding ( gee sort of like McSwane and his supporters ) and it cost her the job she had.
By the way I said then I felt sorry for her. Does she still work for John Kerry. Of course not. So McSwane better choose his actions more carefully and his friends because if he is fired the people supporting him here won't give him a job and in a few weeks when he sinks back into obscurity they will abandon him.
So Please Please Toni save your righteous indignation and first amendment arguments for a conversation where some on is actually saying " YOU CAN'T SAY THAT ".
Originally posted bytoni
Retain your editor in cheif!!!!!!!
I am a mother of two alumni Please do the right thing and retain your editor in chief and everyone else. I suspect this firestorm is more than enough punishment. Please Please don't let us down. Free speech for journalists is a must even when it goes over the top.
Matt
posted 10/04/07 @ 1:56 PM MST
If the Collegian editors are so insistent on expressing free speech, why is the 'F word' omitted from all the follow on articles? Were they only concerned about expressing free speech on 21 Sep? Was the opinion peace just an emotional outburst? Is the First Amendment just a convenient shield? One may think is more likely is they are afraid that if they continue to publish the 'F word' they may continue to lose ad revenue. Which makes one wonder at what price the freedoms of the Collegian editors can be purchased?
McSwane should not be fired for printing the 'F word' however a respectful person would resign for letting down his team. His decisions have brought unnecessary stress upon the entire staff thought public ridicule and forced pay cuts.
McSwane should not be fired for printing the 'F word' however a respectful person would resign for letting down his team. His decisions have brought unnecessary stress upon the entire staff thought public ridicule and forced pay cuts.
dante
posted 10/04/07 @ 6:33 PM MST
If we accept that McSwane did this in order to protect our right to 1st Amendment free speech, then I look forward to his dramatic actions next week in support of the 2nd Amendment. Will he stroll threw campus with a shotgun slung over his shoulder? It would certainly have an impact and get people talking! Let's hear it for the Collegian's bold stand in taking action to support all the provisions of our Bill of Rights.
- Displaying 1 - 15 of 15
Spring Break




Sophie Moon
posted 10/04/07 @ 6:21 AM MST
People are entitled to their opinions and they have openly voiced them, but what the critics must remember is their public opinions are also a form of free speech, just like McSwane's was.