And I always was led to believe that freedom of speech doesn't mean say whatever you darn old please, but to refer to it as freedom of expression instead. As long as there's an "in my opinion" in front of a phrase, then you're in the clear. But, I think most of us would even say this about each other, as soon as someone throws an "in my opinion" into a conversation we all just tune out and say, "that idiots opinion isn't worth squat. thank you for wasting 20 seconds of my life." I think we can all comfortably do the same thing with this piece here.

9/26/2007 1:52:10 AM

U NEED 2 STFU

IMO

9/26/2007 1:54:00 AM

I googled the "columnist" and he's the same guy who went out of his way to embarrass army recruiters back in 2005 in Golden, CO when he was 17. Basically the guy went into a recruiters office and said that he was a dropout who did drugs and the recruiters told him how to get around that. It made national news at the time and lead the army to review recruiting practices.

In light of that, the guy seems like you're average 19 year old college smart ass who jerks off to Rage Against the Machine.

[Edited on September 26, 2007 at 2:07 PM. Reason : .]

9/26/2007 2:03:12 PM

^bahaha

9/26/2007 2:46:10 PM

Quote :

"I googled the "columnist" and he's the same guy who went out of his way to embarrass army recruiters back in 2005 in Golden, CO when he was 17. Basically the guy went into a recruiters office and said that he was a dropout who did drugs and the recruiters told him how to get around that. It made national news at the time and lead the army to review recruiting practices."

that seems like pretty good investigative journalism to me.

9/26/2007 2:47:35 PM

Statement From CSU Editor J. David McSwane
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14194938/detail.html

Quote :

"It is extremely upsetting to find some media have manipulated my statements. This is, perhaps, a more subconscious reasoning behind our editorial. I think it's time the media stay strong in a time of secrecy and abridgement of our Constitutional rights rather than spending its time digging up the latest on celebrity divorces or the like. Our judgment is certainly being challenged, but if standing by quietly while free speech is scorned on a college campus is a step in the right direction, you'll find the Editorial Board and me skipping in the opposite direction. We've garnered more attention than we ever wanted or were prepared for. We're students with responsibilities, second jobs and families who have been affected by this media uproar. I kindly ask members of the media to be respectful of CSU's daily operations and the operations of the Collegian, which will continue printing. As a matter of clarification, my investigation into recruiting practices as a 17-year-old has nothing to do with this. That attention had died down, which is how I liked it. In running this editorial, I in no way wished to make national headlines as an individual, but this is the reality that comes with making such a statement."

1) How do you manipulate a four word statement?
2) Bullshit on the not wishing for national headlines part.

This kid is a douche on par with the douche who got tasered to begin with.

9/26/2007 3:19:38 PM

BECAUSE A COLLEGE RAG HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS STATEMENTS OF PROFOUND RETARDATION CONNECTED TO UNRELATED INCIDENTS, AND THEN CLAIM THE PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE OF THOMAS JEFFERSON!!!!1

DOWN WITH THE TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED TABLOID JOURNALISM!!!1

VIVA CSU COLLEGIAN!!!!1



goddammit. you fuckers are gonna turn me into a conservative yet.

9/26/2007 7:18:42 PM

Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya. . . .

9/26/2007 11:26:32 PM

^^both sides are crazy, one is just crazier

9/26/2007 11:31:13 PM

^^^ hahahaha

9/26/2007 11:42:27 PM

a very good friend of mine who writes for several newspapers in greensboro wrote this as an article (listed in his blog) and i thought it was very well written:

http://lukemcintyre.blogspot.com/

Fallout from the F-bomb - Colorado style
FORT COLLINS, Colo. (AP) -- The editor of the Colorado State University newspaper says he has no plans to resign amid criticism about an obscenity used in an editorial about President Bush.

The four-word editorial, published Friday in the Rocky Mountain Collegian, said in large type, "Taser this. (Expletive) Bush."

J. David McSwane, the Collegian's editor-in-chief and a CSU junior, said the newspaper's governing board may fire him but he won't voluntarily step down.

"I think that'd be an insult to the staff who supported the editorial," McSwane told the Fort Collins Coloradoan in Monday's editions.

The newspaper's business manager has said the operation lost $30,000 in advertising in the hours after the editorial was published, and that the pay of student staffers would be cut 10 percent to compensate.

McSwane said the newspaper's student editors decided to use the obscenity because they believe CSU students are apathetic about their freedom of speech and other rights.

"We thought the best way to illustrate that point was to use our freedoms," he said. Full article here

Those who read The Carolinian may remember my opinion on cursing.

In a college paper there are times you can defend "adult language." We are, after all, printing our paper for adults. But that decision has to be defensible just like every decision has to be, from whether you run an article to hiring or firing a writer to changing the color of your skybox.

Oddly enough, my column on cursing also included the phrase "Fuck Bush."

And, like all words, curse words carry meanings and can be used for a purpose. During the course of any political discussion with friends, I will never say "I disapprove of President Bush's stances and I dislike him very much as a person." I will say, probably a number of times, "Fuck Bush." Those two words won't be the crux of my argument, of course, but it's a perfect description of how I feel about our president.

Of course, it wasn't a full 50 percent of what I had to say, and I went on to tie that usage in with the 60s Supreme Court case Cohen v. California that defended a man who had the phrase "Fuck the Draft" posted on the back of his jacket. The difference there being that the back of a jacket is only so big. With a newspaper you'd have to come up with a reason not to include seven or eight hundred words explaining your opinion. The problem with the Colorado editorial is that there isn't one.

Running a four-word editorial like that seems to be the equivalent of having an opportunity to speak with a person in great detail about your political beliefs, and instead screaming "FUCK [political group here]!" over and over. Doesn't make a lot of sense. In fact, it's a pretty stupid decision on their part, and they deserve the flak they're catching for it.

Seeing the difference between a situations where something is defensible and when it isn't is what you call editorial judgement. And, like McSwane, before writing that column I asked the rest of the editorial board what they thought about it. A couple were a little surprised that I even asked. Yes, is the obvious answer. Yes, that column is defensible.

But the same word isn't always the same word, and just yesterday I cut the word "bullshit" out of someone's column because I couldn't think of a single reason for it to be there. Being an editor sometimes means being a dick and not giving someone their way. It also means thinking long and hard about a decision and then making the right one, even if you really don't want to. On a college paper you have to realize that can include anything up to and including firing a friend. Or, more importantly, realizing when you have messed up so badly that you can't defend keeping your own job.

You shouldn't think: can I get away with this one decision?

You think: can I defend myself to the inevitable litany of questions and accusations to come? There's no defense like making consistantly ethical, based on the rules decisions. No chance of a "what about that time you did this?"

In the end, it's not about you. It's about defending the newspaper that was around before you and, assuming you don't screw up too badly, will continue on in the future.

posted by Luke McIntyre at 9/25/2007 07:01:00 AM

9/27/2007 4:08:30 AM

Here's the deal.

McSwane has been jonesing for more national media attention since his last episode (which at least had societal value).... This was the best way he could think of to bring the spotlight back to him.

and it will work. upon graduation, he will land a media position that would not normally have been attainable to him.

I'm thinking, his first gig post-college will be something like Assistant Communications Director for MoveOn.Org





[Edited on September 27, 2007 at 12:21 PM. Reason : ]

9/27/2007 12:20:59 PM

i don't see a problem with the headline. Actually it's kind of funny. Man, people just don't have a sense of humor anymore ...

Really this comes down to the gratuitous use of a "bad word." Because it's offensive. Because the paper, when laden with profanity, cannot adequately market itself to the Main Street, middle-American, small-business owners who advertise within its pages. No longer can the local head shops, pizza take-out places, apartment complexes, and sundry book buy-back services advertise there. No sir. Too offensive.

These people take themselves too seriously. College newspapers aren't serious forums. They don't hire professional journalists. The advertisers are usually mom'n'pops looking for cheap distribution. And the college newspapers that _do_ take themselves seriously, are usually boring and pretentious (see: the Daily Tar Heel).

So, my advice to the administration is -- take a deep breath, laugh it off, and stop pretending that the college rag matters.

9/27/2007 9:41:33 PM

^totally agree. Censorship in America has gotten rediculous. He tried to make a point. Maybe some took something from it, maybe some didnt, and obviously some were offended. When offending someone was deemed a crime I must have been a few beers deep at a tailgate cause i sure don't remember. Get a sense of humor or deal with it...either way, just move on.

9/28/2007 11:00:31 AM

What censorship? He made his speech, and now the advertisers at the paper are making theirs. If he gets fired over this, it will be because his actions caused harm to the paper, not because of his political views. The same would have happened if he had published a "Fuck anarchy" message and advertisers started pulling funds.

9/28/2007 11:11:50 AM

guess what?

his stunt to get personal attention to satisfy his vanity, has caused the CSU paper to lose significant advertising revenue -- thousands of dollars in recurring contracts -- and forced THE ENTIRE STAFF TO HAVE THEIR WAGES PERMANENTLY REDUCED BY 10% TO COMPENSATE

what a fucking douchebag.

I'd say that's serious business, and is not a matter of "lightening up" or "getting a sense of humor" about a "bad word"



[Edited on September 28, 2007 at 7:58 PM. Reason : ]

9/28/2007 7:57:10 PM

^ Gee, I didn't know you could reduce minimum wage by 10%. Or that staff at a college paper worked there "permanently."

Gimme a break; you make it sound like the guy is running a global multinational.

Plus if you were at all capable of reading/understanding/comprehension/all-that-other-good-stuff, you'd note that my commentary above was directed at the mom'n'pop advertisers who were stupid enough to pull funding from the paper. Like the students are going to stop buying books from the local textbook dump because some idiot ran a "FUCK BUSH" headline one day.

People just need to get a grip.

9/29/2007 12:54:37 PM

Quote :

"If he gets fired over this, it will be because his actions caused harm to the paper, not because of his political views."

Frankly, I think the university should tell the advertisers to go fuck themselves and make up for the gap in funding themselves. Why should a college paper -- that's supposed to be a part of a UNIVERSITY -- be beholden to the views of the local idiot mom'n'pop textbook dumps, head shops, escort services, fast food chains, etc. etc.

Basically every university makes this ham-handed decision to "teach kids about the newspaper business" with a college paper. It's basically a thinly-veiled attempt at soaking the local businesses for foot traffic. Then when -- true to their nature -- boys are boys and they run "FUCK BUSH" headlines, the college administration turns tail and runs away fast.

It's basically hypocritical in my view. What if local advertisers stopped running ads because someone wrote a positive column about gay marriage? Would the hallowed University elders step in then? Hm?

Seems to me the point of a college paper is to create a dialogue within the university community. The editor in this case could be chastised for increasing the "noise," but in no case should the advertisers have the final say in this matter.

9/29/2007 1:00:04 PM

Quote :

" be beholden to the views of the local idiot mom'n'pop textbook dumps, head shops, escort services, fast food chains, etc. etc."

Man, you really look down on people, don't you?

Regardless, just as The Rocky Mountain Collegian can express themselves on their editorial page, their advertisers can express themselves with their advertising dollars. Like it or not, this is how most media services operate, and it's how the Collegian operated before printing their column.

The Collegian decided to print an asinine editorial about some idiot being tasered. Welcome to the consequences. Welcome to life.

9/29/2007 1:34:10 PM

Quote :

"College newspapers aren't serious forums. They don't hire professional journalists."

College newspapers are definitely serious forums. And the reason they don't hire professional journalists is because they are one of the only places where someone gets the training they need to become a professional journalist. Their job is to train people and to teach them the ways of the industry. They are definitely a serious forum, considering it's one of the easiest ways for people in college to be heard.

9/29/2007 1:34:47 PM

What if all advertisers stopped running ads because someone wrote an article detrimental to those advertisers' interests? And what if newspapers therefore refrained from printing important information that would have otherwise been printed?

Corruption would inevitably ensue.

9/29/2007 3:24:20 PM

^, ^^^^

Then the people need to write their own paper. If you are going to base your business' finances on other people, then you need to expect that if you make those people unhappy, your finances may disapear.

Here's a thought: If the paper would not print something because it was detrimental to the interests of its advertisers, can you trust that the paper was ever printing the truth in the first place? Doesn't such a paper deserve to go under? And if they don't go under, don't such advertisers deserve to lose their advertising in such a well respected paper?

9/29/2007 4:10:41 PM

Quote :

" Man, you really look down on people, don't you? "

I look down on these particular people. I don't know how you extrapolated that to "everyone." It makes absolutely no sense for them to pull their advertising over this matter. Except to make a "statement," which is no doubt that the local college newspaper must somehow respect teh prez.

Quote :

" Then the people need to write their own paper. If you are going to base your business' finances on other people, then you need to expect that if you make those people unhappy, your finances may disapear. "

What a totally obtuse response.

The college newspaper is emphatically _not_ a business, it's an arm of the University. The University doesn't exist to make money, it exists to educate people.

If we were talking about a privately run and privately financed organization, then fine, I'd agree with you. Your point might actually make _some_ sense instead of being another pseudo-Libertarian flagellation.

So noone has yet answered my question -- if a college newspaper runs an editorial praising the virtues of Gay Marriage (or Drilling in Alaska, or whatever your favorite wedge issue) and the local advertisers pull out money, should the editor be punished? Should the staff lose 10% of their pay?

[Edited on September 29, 2007 at 5:24 PM. Reason : foo]

9/29/2007 5:14:58 PM

Quote :

" College newspapers are definitely serious forums. And the reason they don't hire professional journalists is because they are one of the only places where someone gets the training they need to become a professional journalist. Their job is to train people and to teach them the ways of the industry. They are definitely a serious forum, considering it's one of the easiest ways for people in college to be heard."

Well, your statement clearly doesn't make sense. If the University is serious about running a newspaper that prepares individuals for life in professional journalism, then the ultimate P&L accountability should lead to a professional. Otherwise the whole institution is just "the inmates running the asylum."

Besides, it's not like there isn't a whole "private sector" of journalism out there for students to practice in. My dad was a journalist for 30 years and he didn't run a college newspaper. So much for your theory.

Getting back to my original point -- the college newspaper should be a way to use University foot traffic to spread ideas and encourage debate and keep people up-to-date on what's going on. It shouldn't be a way for the "community" to express their "values" by paying or with-holding advertising dollars. The University exists to give people an intellectual context above and beyond their immediate surroundings.

9/29/2007 5:23:24 PM

Quote :

"I look down on these particular people. It makes absolutely no sense for them to pull their advertising over this matter. Except to make a "statement," which is no doubt that the local college newspaper must somehow respect teh prez."

It doesn't have to make sense to you. They are free to spend or not spend their money as they see fit. But it's interesting to know that one of the things you've taken from your own college education is that you should look down on those whose opinion differs from your own.

To answer your question, if the newspaper's funding is reduced--whatever the reason and whatever the source--then yes, the staff's pay should be reduced to be commensurate with their new budget. Either that, or circulation and/or periodicity should be reduced.

Should the editor be punished? I don't believe that McSwane has been punished. If he is punished, it won't be for his opinion, it will be for the incredibly inarticulate and asinine way in which he expressed it.

9/29/2007 5:57:29 PM

if the purpose of the news paper is educational then what better way to educate aspiring journalists than demonstrate what happens when you don't think and instead do things that piss off the people that pay you checks. If on the other hand it is supposed to be a place where anyone with two brain cells and a copy of notepad can spout whatever bullshit they feel with no consequences then they need to come up with a way of financing that doesn't depend on other people wanting to associate with you.

9/29/2007 6:12:52 PM

Quote :

"But it's interesting to know that one of the things you've taken from your own college education is that you should look down on those whose opinion differs from your own."

I look down on mamby-pamby limp-wrists who think they should advertise in a college newspaper as long as they agree with its opinion page. That just shows a basic lack of common sense and business sense.

Personally I think it's interesting what you think you "know" considering my politics are opposite McSwane's.

Quote :

" To answer your question, if the newspaper's funding is reduced--whatever the reason and whatever the source--then yes, the staff's pay should be reduced to be commensurate with their new budget. Either that, or circulation and/or periodicity should be reduced."

So in your viewpoint the purpose of the college newspaper is to provide cheap advertising to local headshops, pizza joints, etc. etc. and not to further the educational agenda of the University? Just to be clear, here.

Man, with people like you -- no wonder Technician sucks ass.

Quote :

"if the purpose of the news paper is educational then what better way to educate aspiring journalists than demonstrate what happens when you don't think and instead do things that piss off the people that pay you checks."

Yea, because education/enlightenment = making money from local advertisers.

That's why our mainstream news programs today are of such high quality!

[Edited on September 29, 2007 at 7:01 PM. Reason : foo]

9/29/2007 7:01:12 PM

Quote :

"If he is punished, it won't be for his opinion, it will be for the incredibly inarticulate and asinine way in which he expressed it."

Well, on that note, then practically everyone who ever wrote in Technician should be "punished" retroactively.

9/29/2007 7:04:10 PM

[an interesting point]

9/29/2007 8:23:50 PM

Quote :

"I look down on mamby-pamby limp-wrists who think they should advertise in a college newspaper as long as they agree with its opinion page."

So, you look down on people whose views differ from your own?

Quote :

"Personally I think it's interesting what you think you "know" considering my politics are opposite McSwane's."

And what do I "know"? I've never made any reference to your politics.

Quote :

"So in your viewpoint the purpose of the college newspaper is to provide cheap advertising to local headshops, pizza joints, etc. etc. and not to further the educational agenda of the University? "

Where did I ever say that student newspapers exist to provide cheap advertising? Student newspapers exist not to further the educational agenda of the University, but rather to serve and promote the interests of the student body. This is why many student newspapers support themselves financially--to help ensure that their interests are those of the students and not the University administration.

Quote :

"Man, with people like you -- no wonder Technician sucks ass."

I have no problems with the Technician. It gives me crosswords and sudoku.

9/29/2007 9:00:26 PM

Instead of making a thoughtful piece that tied together the tasering of the student and the actions of the current administration, the kid decided to throw thoughtfulness aside, echo what has become a popular sentiment on college campuses, and hope that shock value would make his point for him. Ultimately he misjudged his audience and failed. I'm sure that after his last incident with army recruiters he feels that he's the next Michael Moore and as such any of his thoughts are valid political points.

The fact that the school paper deemed a statement that was both incredibly mindless and potentially offensive as legitimate journalism hurt its credibility as well as its respect in the community. Advertisers have every right to jump ship when any media source turns in a direction that could embarrass them in the future - i.e. when a college paper begins to think that any poorly thought out, knee jerk reaction to a current event is political commentary that needs to be shared.

9/29/2007 9:49:47 PM

^

9/29/2007 10:52:13 PM

Quote :

" The fact that the school paper deemed a statement that was both incredibly mindless and potentially offensive as legitimate journalism hurt its credibility as well as its respect in the community."

Well, then I should point out that the statement was not intended as "journalism." It was intended as "editorial." You might note that while the former is an unbiased, fact-based assessment of a real-world situation, the latter is merely the sharing of a perspective or opinion.

I know in today's media-drenched world, the line between unbiased reporting and opinion is often blurred. But let me reassure you, sir, that what appears on the "Opinion" page is nothing but that. Sorry to disappoint you.

So now you're holding the newspaper to certain standards of opinion -- dictating how it should express its viewpoints. I am assuming the basis is what's "offensive" or "appropriate."

Personally, my opinion -- which may not meet your lofty standards -- is that when a President in wartime expects people your and my age to participate in a foreign war that leaves many of our peers mutilated (as in, without limbs) or dead (as in, without life), an editorial response consisting of a large F-bomb is not highly inappropriate.

And I say that as someone who _does_ support the war; but I don't think this is rhetorically unfair play. War is a difficult thing. It makes young hot-headed people with pens say things like "Fuck Bush," and justifiably so. It's part of the ordeal of questioning we as a society undertake.

If we relegate the public discussion on the war -- especially on college campuses, our intellectual capitols -- to the realm of dull policy papers and sober opinion -- then _that_ is mindless and offensive to our values as a society.

9/30/2007 1:37:54 AM

since when are Editorials put on the front page in 148-point font?

9/30/2007 1:47:04 AM

Smoker, I appreciate your commentary and hope that you understand that this response is not intended in any way to diminish your valid points. I agree with you on the majority of your post.

My use of the term "journalism" may not have been as thought out as needed. However, "journalism" can be used to define any material written for publication in a newspaper or magazine or for broadcast. I certainly understand your point, but regardless of the author, any writing that is published in print media passes at least one person who deems it as appropriate and fitting of the topic at hand. Clearly the four words published as an opinion column are simply one person's opinion, but the simple fact is that someone thought that the incredibly mindless and potentially offensive few words were worth publishing. While not necessarily expressing the views of the paper, the staff still felt that a four word opinion piece based solely on shock value was worth printing.

I understand your feelings towards Bush and can't blame you for any of them. However, the issue at hand is a loud mouth douche being tasered at a John Kerry speech, not the war in Iraq.

9/30/2007 3:56:57 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/05/cnnu.editor/index.html

Quote :

"Editor keeps his job after 'F**k Bush' column FORT COLLINS, Colorado (CNN) -- The editor-in-chief of Colorado State University's newspaper will keep his job after he published a four-word column that said, "Taser this: F**k Bush." The CSU Board of Student Communications met Thursday for nearly four hours in a closed hearing before deciding to admonish instead of fire Rocky Mountain Collegian editor-in-chief David McSwane. Speaking for the board that oversees student media, CSU faculty member Jim Landers read a prepared statement and refused to comment further. "We see the editorial as an opinion which is protected by the First Amendment," Landers read. However, Landers said the board found that the editor had violated the school's ethical standards. "We feel that it caused harm to The Collegian and to student media. It is our judgment that his actions were unethical and unprofessional," Landers said. The September 21 column had prompted the College Republicans to circulate a petition calling for McSwane to resign and advertisers to pull their money out of the publication. A public hearing by the board made up of six students and three faculty members followed. That event attracted hundreds of students, many of whom had to be turned away from the packed room. To some who heard Thursday's ruling, it simply wasn't enough. "He got off easy," said Cole Weinman, a student media employee who has worked for the campus newspaper, radio and television station. "I don't know that the decision correlates with what has happened here." One member of The Collegian's editorial board said he was glad the issue is behind them. "I'm just relieved that it's over and I'm glad they made the decision that they did," said Sean Star, an editor for The Collegian. Star also expressed his admiration for McSwane. "I think he handled it extremely well considering the amount of coverage that it got," Star said. "People need to realize that he's a 20-year-old student and not a professional yet." After the hearing was adjourned, McSwane and his lawyer immediately left and canceled a press conference scheduled for later Thursday evening. He refused to comment for this story. Board member Elise Stephens, a 22-year-old student, said that McSwane showed little emotion through the entire process. "He's really hard to read and that about covers it," Stephens said. "He didn't say or do anything really when we read our decision. He thanked us, but I think that's about it." "I think our meeting went so long tonight because it is a First Amendment situation," she said. "We had to consider every side of it." McSwane's column resulted in lost revenue for the self-funded newspaper, including 18 advertisers and up to $50,000, director of student media Jeff Browne said at the public meeting on September 26. Despite heavy criticism, The Collegian editorial board was pleased with Thursday's decision, Star said. "I've never been an editor before and, to me, he's the best boss I've ever had," Star said. "I think it helped him a lot that the editorial board was behind him during this whole thing.""

The fact that he brought in a lawyer and scheduled press conferences says a lot.

10/5/2007 1:20:44 PM