A post by Maynard
Here’s another peek at the blatant self-hating double-standard that permeates the academic landscape.
The student editor of the Colorado State University newspaper was admonished Thursday for the paper’s use of an obscenity in an editorial about President Bush but David McSwane will be allowed to keep his job.
Okay, fair enough. Some university papers glory in their verbal vitriol and angry rhetoric. This may be tasteless or vulgar at times, but we give the media a lot of leeway in this country. We take our First Amendment rights seriously (and I wish we’d do the same for the Second Amendment — but that’s another topic). Can you ever remember a case of anyone at a student paper losing his position for editorial excess?
Hmmm, now that I mention it, last year the editor of The Daily Illini at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was summarily dismissed after publishing the notorious Mohammed cartoons. This was, you’ll recall, the biggest news story in the world for a time, and the mainstream media displayed uncharacteristic sensitivity in omitting the essential details of what the story was really all about. The media, which is so brave when it comes to exposing anything negative about America (think about, for example, prison photos from Abu Ghraib, or classified details of covert anti-terrorism operations, or artistic ordure like “Piss Christ”) suddenly started worrying about offending people.
The fired Illini editor, Acton Gordon, describes his experience here.
So free speech is protected as long as it isn’t troublesome or “wrong”. Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma relates the following chilling anecdote:
I was going over to vote the other day and I was walking with two very liberal gals [identified elsewhere as Sens. Clinton and Boxer] that didn’t pay any attention to me being with them. They were outraged by something you said or Rush Limbaugh or somebody said that upset them. They said, “We have got to do something about this, these are nothing but far-right wing extremists. We’ve got to have a balance, there’s got to be a legislative fix to this.”
This would be the restoration of the Orwellian “Fairness Doctrine”, which would restrict “unbalanced” free speech. This policy had ended under the Reagan administration, but the Democrats moved to revive it in 1993. That attempt failed, but it looks like they’re gearing up for another go. Yet another reason to worry about a Hillary administration.
Maynard – Hill cant pas laws. Congress passes them and the President either signs or vetoes them. If your fear the Fairness doc revival you need to get together with Newt (who stopped it 14 years ago) and find conservatives to run as Republicans in 08.
Bill did not make “Wellfare Reform” nor did he want it. Newt did both and made Bill sign with a Veto proof vote.
The only solution – that has a chance, as Karl and GWB have made the White House a lock for the D’s – is throw out the liberal Republicans in the House and replace them with conservatives. Hard work but at least possible. The President is going to be a Dem – Thank former hippy from Tx Karl Rove.
The fairness doctrine is more pc censorship, simple as that.
As for hypocrisy, it just seems that this isn’t news anymore. It is constant, and the biggest show of hypocrisy is Dems avoiding the Fox debates on the grounds that Fox is biased. We all know that the other outlets are biased as well, but biased in the correct direction for Dems.
The answer? Blogs like this, radio like Tammy, and folks that write local papers every chance they get. Vote, vote, vote.