Not that I'm hopeful that the Freelancer will respond (so far my comments about The Economist and anonymity have curiously been ignored), but I decided to do a little research on college newspaper censorship. It was pretty tough -- I had to actually do a Google search for "college newspaper censorship," after all.
1. The Supreme Court refused to hear cases involving campus newspaper censorship back in 2006, without comment or recorded dissent. It rules in a similar case involving high school newspapers that public school officials could censor student newspapers without violating the students' first amendment rights. An appeals court ruled that that decision also applied to student newspapers subsidized by public colleges and universities.
2. The appellate court ruling I referred to in point 1 was related to a case involving students at Governors State University in University Park, Illinois.
The newspaper in 2000 published a number of articles critical of the school's administration, including one about the decision not to renew the teaching contract of the Innovator's adviser.
Patricia Carter, the dean of student affairs, called the company that printed the newspaper and ordered it not to print any copies without prior approval from a school administrator.
The students refused to submit their articles to the administration for review and approval before publication.
(from
redOrbit
(by the way - did you see what I did there? I quoted another article, referred back to the original source, and am using it to support an original post of my own. That's how bloggers use cut and paste, as I mentioned in my last post here that you've so far ignored.) The old hags on the board will possibly remember an incident back in the late 80s when students at Liberty didn't submit something to a faculty adviser for review before it was released. I think part of the reason that Liberty controls student media as much as it does is because of past problems when students did what they wanted to do without faculty oversight.
3. You asked what other colleges censor their student papers. Of course, it really doesn't matter to you; the only free campus press you are really concerned about is Liberty's, but I found a few other schools that do it. Obviously, Governors State does (see point 1). Chicago State does as well; in fact, in February of this year, the faculty adviser ordered the presses stopped because he thought there wasn't enough original content, and what content there was was of poor quality. (And of course, the point of a student publication is to educate journalism students, rather than to provide a forum for students to rant against the school.) Personally, I think that it was a stupid decision; students learn from their mistakes, so the paper should have gone to press. But I digress.
The Student Press Law Center has some pretty good resources relating to college newspapers and censorship. An interesting case is made regarding the University of Massachusetts, where they actually guarantee space in the paper for all points of view, even those that are totally against everything the university stands for (as you want Liberty to do). Unfortunately, this has created other problems. "How can the press recognize, define, and meet its social responsibilities without at the same time sacrificing its ethics? The page recognizes the pages' lack of professionalism in some cases because of inadequate basic reporting and editing skills on the part of those producing them. These inadequacies make the pages difficult to read and increase the danger of libel suits." (from
Censorship Issues in College Newspapers -- see? I did it again
) The same article points out that while many university-owned papers won't experience outright censorship, they will experience the dismissal of their faculty adviser. I like their suggested solution -- an independent student paper. If financial backing isn't available, a blog would be another option.
I'm guessing that's what you're trying to do with the Freelance. I still have an issue with the anonymity (which I look forward to you addressing), and the original content vs. cut and paste stuff. There still seems to be a combative attitude (the ski slope issue stands out in my mind as an example of the blog expressing outrage without having all the facts about something), and there is certainly a lack of time spent on news that shows the school in a positive light (compare the time spent on the
Unlikely Disciple vs. the time spent on Liberty students' civic involvement, or Liberty athletics. Rather than taking some of the suggestions we've made here seriously, you're spending an awful lot of time here arguing about how you're right and we all just don't understand you. You are as rigid and set in your ways as any FlameFans poster; the only difference is that most of us know we are.
I refuse to comment on the other stuff that's taken this thread slightly off topic, except to say that government has no business getting involved in marriage at all. Marriage is a religious ceremony, not a civic one. I don't even like having to be licensed to perform marriages, or having to get a marriage license to be "officially" married. I don't care who the government wants to recognize as being 'civilly united' or whatever they want to call it, but marriage is a straight up church issue. Government involvement in it is a violation of the separation of church and state that so many people on the left seem to love so much.
{EDIT TO ADD}
And Liberty sophomore Michael Hayden will try to break the record in it. He's going to try to run the most miles in 24 hours. The run will take place in the LaHaye Student Union. I hope no one walks by and taps the stop button, sending Mr. Hayden toppling over the railing above the basketball courts.
The emphasized portion should give you a pretty good indication of why people won't (or don't) take The Liberty Freelance seriously.
- By thecomeback
- By Ill flame