Today’s News-Leader has a story about a group of students at Missouri State University that wanted to show their high level of intelligence and their concern for the community by holding up large signs with the “F” word. The students say they were concerned about “censorship” and they took issue with the fact the University wanted to show some common courtesy for people passing by an open-air concert and not have them sing the “F” word where some people who could be offended by it would hear it. This is simple, common courtesy for other people and apparently something that these students lack within themselves.
I’m against censorship in all ways. This request by the University was not censorship. The band was free to play, the band was free to express their angst or other thoughts and the band was free to use other profane words. They asked they not use one word and suddenly these students want to come out and slam the University for advocating censorship. It’s small-minded, short-sighted and unfortunately a hallmark of what’s happening in society today.
We have a large group of younger people who have been raised to hear they have the right to do whatever they want whenever they want and if someone stands in their way they should yell and scream like a two year old who’s been told he can’t watch Spongebob Squarepants. They’ve seen the antics of activist groups over the last decade who when confronted with their bad behavior turn around and point the finger at someone else to say they have to do what they do because someone else is a homophobe/trying to censor them/not listening to them. Respect for others is something that gets thrown out the window because these “spoiled children” are not getting their way.
Now, there’s a place for protest and it’s a vital part of our political system. Protests through the years have raised awareness of vital issues and forced society to look at issues that it did not want to face. However, the most effective protests are the ones that did not include violence and vulgar activity. Dr. Martin Luther King would not be sitting around holding a sign with the F-word. He would have found a way to get attention to even the most distasteful subject (in the eyes of the ruling majority) using language and ways that are like that of the majority.
Maybe we’ve reached the point where protesters are less concerned with making others believe what they want to believe than they are with offending people and calling attention to themselves. These students certainly did the latter. Other local activists like Code Pink act the same way.
My question is would these students been as open to come out and protest if a Christian group performed on campus and was told not to say “Jesus” because it might offend a Muslim? We’re quickly reaching that point at Missouri State University. Something tells me that students would be out yelling the F-word in front of elementary school children would also be the first to cheer those silencing someone yelling “Jesus” on the campus.
Free speech and lack of censorship is either universal or it’s not. You can’t cry for open speech on one side and not the other. However, does anyone really want that? These days, I can’t see a protest like we saw at MSU and think we do.
Of course there would be protests if a Christian group at the MSU mall were restricted from using the word “jJsus” (as well there should be).
There is nothing wrong with college students protesting on a college campus. That is where students learn how to advocate and make their views known. It’s not different than Christians who stand on the side of the road and protest abortion with nasty signs. I don’t like the signs, but I support their right to protest.
Are you sure you are against all of this, or only when the content is not to your liking? I ask that with respect and seriousness, not as a jab.
Ooops. That should have read “Jesus”. Whom I am down with, by the way.
Jack, my question wasn’t whether there would be protests per se but if these students who were so fond of waving around the F-word would be protesting that “censorship” or not.
And I said in the blog that I was against censorship and that there was a place for protest so I don’t see where your question is coming from, Jack.
“This request by the University was not censorship.”
American Heritage Dictionary:
censorship: cen.sor.ship, noun. the act, process, or practice of censoring.
censor: cen.sor, noun. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
Wordnet:
censorship, noun: deleting parts of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances.
The kids were censored, it was a violation of their first amendment rights, and they have the right to protest.
MSU might think through their decisions more thoroughly next time. I bet more folks were offended by the “F-word” signs than might have heard the lyric walking by.
Nice try, Sky Girl.
For this to be censorship, the University would have had to be telling students participating in an event they had to be a part of for a grade or other activity with an impact on their school grade for it to be censorship. This was an extra-curricular activity where the school has every right to set the rules and one of those rules was that the F-word could not be used.
The band could have chosen not to participate in the event after the rules were put in place. They have no right to be a part of any extra curricular activity on that campus or anywhere else. The attitude they have the “right” to be in an event and to do whatever they want within it and that the people running it have no say on what can be in the show is part of the attitude to which I was referring in the blog.
Did you not trust my sources? Here is the Miriam-Webster definition. Interesting it goes back to a word meaning “to give as one’s opinion.” After all, isn’t this entire issue at MSU based on someone’s opinion of what is offensive?
Censor:
Etymology:
Latin, Roman magistrate, from censēre to give as one’s opinion
1: a person who supervises conduct and morals: as a: an official who examines materials (as publications or films) for objectionable matter b: an official (as in time of war) who reads communications (as letters) and deletes material considered sensitive or harmful.
censorship:
1 a: the institution, system, or practice of censoring
Funny, none of these definitions include anything about the subject of the censor having to be an institutionally sanctioned event.
I think you have added that part of the definition on your own, Jason, to make it more narrow to fit your argument here. That or you’re confusing censorship with harassment.
I wasn’t trying to speak to whether or not these kids have an entitled attitude. I’ve never met them. But to be told to leave a part of a piece of work (art, drama, music, etc.) out because it could be “offensive” is by definition censorship.
MSU is not a private institution, it is a government institution which uses tax dollars to function. In that capacity, whether the event is required of students of not, I’d say they can’t tell people what they can and cannot say. The constitution is pretty clear on that.
BTW, Jason, I really enjoyed this dialog even though we disagree. It’s an interesting topic.
Me too. It’s certainly something that can be viewed from many angles.
I saw this protest myself on Friday and thought that it could have been much more confrontational. All I saw were about a dozen students silently holding signs. I observed no yelling or shouting of expletives.
Was there irony in this event (the band) was held in the former SMSU Free Speech area?
An area I remember was frequently used a troupe of “crazy” Xian-fundi’s who came into town each year (in the 80’s) and would verbally harrass student passersby with taunts of “whore”, “fornacator,” etc.
I don’t think that holding up a sign with the F word is that bad. If I can hold one up that says F you too. I mean isn’t that what free speech is all about.