The Sentinel

Issue date: 10/14/09 Section: News

Media Credit: Alex Kotran Greg Lukianoff speaks at OSU

FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has ten years of success to celebrate before 2009 is over. During the past decade, the organization has seen 155 public victories at 118 different colleges, which has affected over 25 million students and resulted in 77 changes in universities' policies. Not bad for a small non-profit that, until recent years, seemed to be beneath media radar. The organization primarily provides legal resources for students and other members of university communities who feel their first amendment rights have been violated. They work to overturn unconstitutional policies and speech codes on college campuses, and usually are able to do so without litigation. The few times a case has gone through proceedings, FIRE's side has won every time. On September 24 FIRE's President Greg Lukianoff, spoke at Moritz Law School about the organization's past, the future, and what the implications are of unconstitutional policies and the ideology from which they stem.

A graduate of Stanford Law, Lukianoff is an expert on first amendment rights, a blogger for the Huffington Post, and most notably the first ever recipient of the Playboy Foundation Freedom of Expression Award. His passion for liberty is evident in his demeanor; if you didn't care about first amendment rights before his lecture, you definitely did afterward.

Is liberty dwindling at universities, and more importantly at ours? It becomes harrowingly indicative that there is a clear problem that needs to be taken care of "when people start believing that censorship is noble," Lukianoff says as he pulls from example cases. One of the first that he cites is from the University of Kentucky; an instance involving the often-visited issue of abortion. Pro-life activists had their displays ripped down and torn apart by pro-choice retaliators who "had to destroy the display to exercise their first amendment rights." This obviously contradictive behavior is disconcerting; the fundamentals of free speech rights are based on "let do" principles, not destruction. When I learned about inalienable rights in grade school, we were taught that we were free to exercise those stated rights bearing in mind we don't infringe upon the opportunities of others. This case brings to mind a similar event at OSU- the recent protest of Tucker Max.

Tucker Max, a controversial, middle-aged writer with the beginnings of a beer belly and a complex the size of China spoke at an OUAB event this past May. Flanked by dozens of protesters, the event caused quite a flurry. Max's popular book I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell is a compilation of pseudo-frat boy stories that cover every college-aged male's favorite topics: booze, bros and sluts. His riotous tall tales cover topics that are often considered demeaning to women, and the protesters at the event made this very clear. The group chanted, ranted and called him a rapist, all while he was supposed to be speaking on the other side of a wall.

An idiot? Perhaps, but a rapist Tucker Max is not. Whether you like the guy or not, the fact of the matter is that he has every right to come to OSU and speak, especially when a majority of the student body responds in a favorable manner by voluntarily attending the event. More importantly, he also has the right to speak uninterrupted and without prominent distraction, which is what a fifty person mob yelling "Pig!" is.

Lukianoff makes an excellent point; if we as people shelter ourselves from being offended, what happens to a person's identity and society in general?

Sure, not everyone will be entertained by a chauvinist with a drinking problem, but that doesn't mean Tucker Max shouldn't be allowed to express himself.

Likewise, a university hardly enjoys harsh and nasty comments made about their institution on someone's Facebook page, but it's just that: a Facebook page. Believe it or not, their jurisdiction does not cover social media networking sites.

Whether it's activists on the oval or a pro-life poster campaign, it is common knowledge that these demonstrations can be divisive and in fact I often feel disgusted when I pass these displays, however that doesn't give me the right to silence them. Instead of silencing or shying away from things that shake our inner values, we should view them as opportunities to strengthen our own beliefs and to educate ourselves further on the issues which we are passionate about.

"Free speech is a hard road," Lukianoff says, affirming the battles which are currently being fought on campuses today. We here at The Sentinel have traveled down that path, and find ourselves perpetually embattled against a large group of "tolerant" political activists who seem to find our presence a little too intense to handle. Just a few years ago, several stacks of our publication were being chucked into recycling bins after we published a controversial article on global warming. The main perpetrator turned out to be a psychology professor, an actual faculty member, who teaches OSU students every day. What a disconcerting notion; the very people who are meant to guide and educate us are committing acts of blatant, unconstitutional censorship. What is this person teaching their students, and more importantly what if one of those students chooses to disagree with her? Rather than pursue an intellectual conversation will she choose to ultimately dismiss and destroy that student's opinion? Lukianoff advises that "being offended is part of being educated," and this rings all too true.

Newspaper theft is a common occurrence on college campuses, frequently committed by students and in the Sentinel's case by a professor. Brainwashing, oversensitivity, free speech zones and harassment policies are all common concerns that are brought to FIRE by university communities. One amusing case worth mentioning involved a university harassment code which included a clause that attempted to discourage discrimination by not allowing students to "perceive or treat someone" as a part of their sex.

Have you ever laughed during an inappropriate moment? That, too, has been railed against in a university speech policy. These arbitrary, subjective policies are on the books at campuses all over the country, and punishment is usually left at the discretion of whatever administrators are in place at the time. Usually, when a public case is presented to an institution, they eventually give in to avoid bad publicity. Sometimes, however, a case will be pursued further in court and is usually resolved quickly because the policies are often blatantly unconstitutional.

Why a university would create a speech code with such obvious discrepancies is glaringly simple; risk management has become more important - and cost effective - than upholding constitutional rights. With harassment laws and diversity initiatives coming out of the woodwork, educational institutions are pressured by external risk management companies to create codes and policies to essentially ward off potential lawsuits from students and staff. This has created an environment of hyper-sensitivity that results in overblown and unreasonable policies that are impractical at best and often times illegal. An exaggerated sense of vulnerability combined with uninformed, knee-jerk reactions by administrations has left students across the nation battling for their freedom.

FIRE is working to modify the equation by creating a legally binding environment which would prove more costly for educational institutions that have unconstitutional practices. According to Lukianoff, one way they do so is by mailing certified letters that notify schools of their violations. By officially informing them of their breach of constitutionality, FIRE is giving schools an opportunity to amend their policies before a case is presented to the public. Failure to make modifications reflects unkindly in a court of law if a case is pursued against the school later on, and leaves educational institutions vulnerable to an unfavorable and expensive ruling.
Last year, an employee and part time student at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis received a letter from the Affirmative Action Office concerning racial harassment for reading a book titled Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan by Todd Tucker. Keith John Sampson was found guilty, without a hearing, for silently reading the book while on a lunch break at work. A co-worker had filed a complaint against Sampson after literally judging the book by its cover. Had they taken the time to discuss the text they would have learned that it actually celebrates the defeat of the KKK. At a hearing with the AAO, Sampson attempted to show the book to the hearing officer, however, she had little to no interest in hearing about the facts behind the case.

The AAO at IU-PUI demanded that Keith Sampson modify his reading habits or face serious consequences, and left him no opportunity to refute the charges made against him. Until FIRE stepped in, Sampson was facing a permanent racial harassment incident on his university file, the same offense that is assigned to practicing Klan members. FIRE publicized the case and sent a letter to the chancellor, and after months of being publicly berated the president of the university finally gave in and issued an apology. Unfortunately apologies are rare, and even when given they do not change the attitudes of the entire administrative staff. These problems will continue to rise so long as administrators are left to believe that they maintain a level of power higher than that of our constitution.

University administrators have their jobs solely because students choose to enroll at their schools. Students should empower themselves by always questioning authority, especially arbitrary and subjective rules. We shouldn't be intimidated by administrations; we should be challenging it when appropriate with reason and objectivity. Last January The Sentinel discussed Ohio State's less-than favorable speech code and the importance of seeing this changed. It is important, now more than ever, that the OSU community take action in seeing these changes implemented. In a political and social climate that becomes more paternalistic every day, it is imperative that students remain aware of their rights as American citizens in order to preserve the intellectual exchange and fundamental liberties which serve as the backbone of educational efficacy.

Want to help liberate our campus? Visit thefire.org or the cfn.org for resources on first amendment rights and more.

Debbie Bitzan is graduating in approximately 60 days with degrees in Economics and International Studies. She's not counting down or anything. If you want to distract her from studying by sending her YouTube videos you can e-mail dbitzan@osusentinel.com.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools