Alex Pedersen

Emporia State University is a great school.

I respect and love this place and I have been enjoying going to school here for years. I love the teachers, the classes, the architecture, the history and, of course, all of my peers. The campus is beautiful and I am genuinely happy I chose ESU.

ESU may be fairly small, but it is moving forward, trying to become bigger as we can see with things like the Union renovation. Despite its size, ESU seems to be as open-minded and progressive as any larger school.

But we have a single designated “free speech zone” on our campus.

Ridiculous.

The entire campus should be a free speech zone, there should be absolutely no censorship on the campus.

Now, that is not to say that microphones are listening in on your conversations, waiting to hear you insult a teacher outside of the zone. It does mean that a recognized student organization, or any organization for that matter, can only proliferate propaganda on one small part of the school.

The rules are that an RSO can use chalk to advertise for something anywhere on the sidewalk on campus, but they can only write political and persuasive messages in the confines of the Union Square. Also, offensive messages are disallowed. These rules also apply for any public demonstration, like the protest against the Iraq war a few years ago.

I can understand that ESU would not want spray paint on their sidewalks or buildings, although a college that had an open graffiti policy would probably be the coolest looking school possible.

I can also see the argument against a campus-wide free speech zone. We are already bombarded with so many messages, it will only create clutter and the school could be held responsible for any offensive messages.

But we are all adults. If you ever watch more than 30 minutes of television, then you can see how you are already bombarded with persuasive messages. Every single advertisement and TV show you watch is filled with various messages on what to buy, who to believe, what to do.

I would say that it takes at least a certain amount of intelligence to come to school, so it’s safe to reason that every single student at ESU is smart enough to interpret and evaluate any message they see. If students saw the message, “do not go to class today,” it is likely that most would still go to class because we can think rationally. We are able to disagree and not follow a message’s command if we do not want to, we are all mentally competent.

So why is the school treating us like they are an overbearing parent, like we are stupid? Why do they want to censor anything that could be controversial? Why are they forcing anything with any passion into the choke hold of the Union Square?

The answer is fear. They give us the chalkboard of the Union Square because they don’t want us to write on the wall with our crayons.

It is odd that the school chose the Union Square to be its free speech zone, as it is at the heart of the school. But it is also tucked away and a very small area, it would be hard to get more than 100 people in the Square comfortably. I am reminded of a singer with a beautiful, powerful, strong voice that is forced to wear a muzzle.

A University is naturally a hub for ideas and knowledge, an exchange point for brilliance. Each day we go to class, we are trading intelligence and learning from each other. There is no need to censor us to any degree because we are all able to judge for ourselves what we believe or do not.

Fuck Censorship.

Send article as PDF to

No one will deny that there is a communication problem on campus. Groups plan and put together amazing events, and experience little attendance. Conversely, students are constantly complaining that there is never anything to do on campus.  This leads us to believe that it is in the communication of the events that problem exits – getting the information to those who are interested.

On campus there are only a select few ways to promote for an upcoming event. Groups can use the Buzz-In feature of student email, and it will be displayed on the school Web site. Groups can also promote their event by tabling in the union, passing information to those who walk by.

The most popular method for disbursing information is the poster route, used to hang posters across campus. This allows the information to be seen evenly throughout the school by every department, staff student and faculty alike.

Though it may be the best way to currently advertise on campus, it is not as efficient or as fairly run as it could be. There are numerous rules and restrictions that exist within the poster route, and the process can be confusing to those unfamiliar with it.

The poster route policy is as follows: only recognized student organizations (RSOs) or university departments are allowed to put up posters anywhere around campus. They must be approved by the CSI office and contain the Power E, name of the organization, and some basic contact information.

This restricts a sizable amount of people who would like to advertise on campus for one reason or another. If someone is looking for a roommate, lost dog, or information on employment opportunities, they must look elsewhere to spread or find information. Because of this, organizations and businesses in the Emporia community cannot advertise at all on campus unless somehow connected to an on campus organization.

There are a handful of free bulletin boards throughout campus that allows anyone to advertise whatever they would like, but they are difficult to locate and because of that are sparsely noticed.

The school’s official reasoning for why they do not permit businesses or organizations to advertise on campus is because they wish to retain stability on campus. They believe that by allowing outsiders, or even students unaffiliated with an organization, to advertise their cause it would create a chaotic environment on campus.

College should be a time of open ideas and new mindsets. People come to college to grow as people, not only educationally but also politically, socially, and spiritually. We can understand the school’s desire to keep campus an argument free area, free of any intense debates or discord. But by doing so, they are actually robbing their students of the full college experience.

If you look at campuses like KU or WSU, you’ll see fliers all over the place advertising everything from church functions to bar specials to local musical acts.  These campuses have little restrictions, outside of general vulgarity or profanity rules, and their students do not seem to be suffering because of it. If anything, their student body is flourishing for all the great activities that are presented to them.

No one is saying the school has to take a position on the issues and the activities that are present on campus. No one would want that. All we are asking is that the school gives students the freedom to make up their own minds about these issues. Present us with the situation and trust in us to do what we feel is right for us. That is one of the true goals of a good college.

The university won’t be there forever to shield us from the controversial issues of life. Eventually we will be in the real world and will have to decide how we feel about it. We should be experiencing that now so that we can be even more prepared once we leave here.

We ask that the school reconsider their restrictive policy towards the poster route, and open the conversation about what should be acceptable and what shouldn’t. We realize it can be subjective, but we would like the right to make that decision as a student body, and not be told what we are ready or not ready to see.

The benefit would be an increase in attendance and awareness about the great things happening on campus put on by groups and the campus itself. The other advantage would be students would get the experience to create their own opinions about important issues, and will grow as people because of it.

Send article as PDF to

Emporia State’s Union Square is the university’s designated “free forum” area for protests, pamphlets etc., according to the ESU Policy Manual.

“I kind of knew about Union Square’s function as a protest area,” said Paul Bennett, junior engineering major. “I agree and disagree with having it limited to one area. Universities attract all sorts of minds, so it gives a place for protests to happen that has some traffic but can be monitored for safety also.”

According to the ESU Policy Manual, part of the freedom in the academic community is the student’s right to orderly dissent and protest against any decision or issue. The area between Plumb Hall and the Memorial Union has been designated as the Free Forum Area and may be reserved by individual students or student organizations, through the Conferences and Scheduling Office in the Memorial Union.

“I wasn’t aware that Union Square had a function as an area for staging protests,” said Stephanie Russell, senior graphic design major. “I know where to protest now and it’s awesome.”

The Policy Manual also clarifies that the demonstration or publications being distributed will be free from censorship as long as they are not attempting to disrupt the academic nature of the school or incite a riot.

“I think it’s nice, but it’s too small an area to make a big difference,” said Erica Cassella, junior photography major. “I think students should be able to protest in some place other than a concrete jungle. It’s small and confined. It’s like you’re controlling them and keeping them from speaking their mind someplace they want to.”

Lastly, the Policy Manual asks that Individuals wishing to demonstrate confer with the office of the Assistant Vice President for Student Life where procedural policy for such events and their accompanying responsibilities will be explained.

Josh Johnson/The Bulletin

Send article as PDF to

Infographic By Kelsey Wright

Angered by two staff editorials that appeared in The Bulletin, the administration has declared that they are in an “adversarial” relationship with the student newspaper, seeking the possibility of an increased role of the Student Media Board in editorial decisions and re-evaluating the role of The Bulletin’s adviser.

At the center of the controversy are the changes that President Michael Lane directed his subordinates to seek in the advising and management of The Bulletin, which has been an independent student newspaper since 1901. Lane, however, has declined a request for an interview and has not communicated his concerns directly to The Bulletin staff or agreed to meet with the Editor-In-Chief. Her letter requesting a meeting and his response are printed on the Opinion page.

“I think (the situation) is twisting and turning,” said Marie Miller, chair of the English, Modern Languages and Journalism Department. “All I can report to was what the president and I talked about, and one of the items was this evaluation process. He and I talked about three very, very specific items – that he had no intention of changing the adviser, the evaluation process and the actual job description itself. He was unclear what the job description was.”

Last Friday, the Department of English, Modern Languages and Journalism met and voted to write a letter to administration in support of The Bulletin’s adviser and assistant professor of journalism, Max McCoy, The Bulletin, free speech and academic freedom.

During the meeting, McCoy spoke to the department about a meeting he held with the dean on Nov. 9. The dean told McCoy that the actions of the administration were triggered by two editorials, one on parking and the other on campus banking, in which the word “bribe” was used.

The Oct. 1 parking editorial incorrectly stated that the parking meter prices had risen and suggested that this was to help fund Memorial Union renovations. The price error was corrected in the next print edition of The Bulletin.

Another concern of Lane’s was the banking story, which used an open records request to expose a $600,000 contribution to the ESU foundation for the Memorial Union renovations. In an editorial that ran in the same issue, the contribution was referred to as a bribe.

According to McCoy’s notes, which were distributed at the department meeting, President Lane considered the word “bribe” defamatory and said the newspaper was “off the reservation.” He didn’t remember approving the most recent Student Media Board Constitution and he desired to see the constitution revised.

Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, confirmed that criticism is still a protected media right, despite how “angered” the administration might be.

“It’s absolutely protected speech to publish negative or critical information or opinion about the school,” LoMonte said. “The core mission of the student media is to inform people about what is happening on campus even if that reflects poorly on the college.”

The administration first raised the question of the staff editorials in an email from Lynn Hobson, vice president of student life, to McCoy.

“I would like to meet and discuss a number of the staff editorials which have appeared in the papers so far this semester,” Hobson wrote in the email on Oct. 20. “I would like to know what your thoughts are about who should be involved in this discussion….Media Board, Advisor, editor, me, etc. Please let me know.”

McCoy replied that he was uncomfortable meeting to discuss The Bulletin editorial content, as it might be perceived as an attempt to censor news and opinion. He suggested Hobson contact the Editor-in-Chief of The Bulletin directly.

McCoy does not edit or read any part of The Bulletin prior to publication.

“We do see very, very often at the college level that the adviser takes the brunt of what the students did,” LoMonte said. “That’s a very common occurrence because schools know that there’s only so much that they can do to the students. The students are paying customers and they want their money. But the adviser, especially an untenured adviser, is in a much more vulnerable position and unfortunately they often become the fall-guy. That is the school’s way of intimidating the students. It’s almost like a hostage situation. ‘If you don’t tone down your criticism of the school, bad things will happen to your adviser.’”

The role of the adviser was something that was discussed at length during the department meeting last Friday. The department felt that McCoy was fulfilling his role as adviser.

“(President Lane) admitted he went off given the recent decision from the Board of Regents on time that is taken from teaching and applied to other service areas and the efficiency report just really stirred up a lot of issues and the president apologized for that. (He) immediately began thinking about the efficiency report and the fact that this was the equivalent to one course load each semester and that it was not being evaluated,” Miller said during the department meeting.

However, the position of adviser to The Bulletin is evaluated by Faculty Recognition Committee.

“The FRC (Faculty Recognition Committee) absolutely reviews the adviser to The Bulletin,” said Rachelle Smith, associate professor of English, said during the department meeting. “We look at a number of documents that are submitted to the FRC as well as student evaluations that are done by the Bulletin students. We have found Professor McCoy’s performance as an adviser to be exceptional and absolutely in accordance with the standards of the profession and our understanding of those standards.”

Also in question is the Student Media Board Constitution, which is the document governing document of The Bulletin.

“That constitution was very carefully crafted 30 or 40 years ago specifically to let the student media do their job,” said Sally Turner, former adviser for The Bulletin and current president of College Media Advisers. “It has really worked well, even though people complain about the media, they have kept their hands off and that way the students learn and they can go on to perfect their craft and really be proud of the product that they produce while they’re in school, so I hope that nobody toys with that.”

The Student Media Board Constitution says that the Associated Student Government will appoint four members to serve. At a meeting on Sept. 24, senior political science major Jonathan Krueger appointed undergraduate student Kurt Fifelski, ASG senators Ashley McCullough and Bo Moddelmog and graduate student and ASG adviser Whitney McGinnis.

According to the document, there can only be two members of ASG appointed to the board, which Kelsey Ryan, Editor-in-Chief, brought to Krueger’s attention. She said that she believes the adviser counts as a member of ASG, making three ASG members on the Student Media Board. Krueger responded that while he disagrees, McCullough will be replaced on the board by undergraduate Alli Jordan.

Lane expressed his concerns with the Media Board constitution to Miller, which she relayed at the faculty meeting.

“At the time when all of this came up on Monday, (Lane) said that he did not remember ever signing off on that Constitution and he didn’t agree with it,” Miller said. “He admitted to me this morning that yes, he does have a copy of which he signed off on.”

Members of the administration have also expressed concerns with the accuracy of the reporting in The Bulletin and suggested ways to improve the accuracy. They also questioned the practices of Bulletin reporters.

“I wonder whether there is a method to try to ensure accuracy and whether the students feel like that method is working right now,” said Steve Brown, Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences during an interview on Monday. “If that method is not working, are there other ways that you all could come up with that might ensure better accuracy in reporting? It’s not for me to try to suggest or impose. Truthfully, anything I might suggest or impose might be more flawed than what we’re working with now.”

LoMonte said that questioning the accuracy of a publication was a red flag for potential prior review.

“Our concern when we hear buzz words like quality and accuracy thrown around is that administrators are trying to nose their way into the newsroom by claiming they just want to improve the quality,” LoMonte said. “It’s especially suspicious when that follows very closely an investigative story or a hard-hitting editorial that makes them unhappy.”

Jim Ryan, professor of theater and member of the Student Media Board, suggested that accuracy may not be the issue in question.

“I’m not sure if it has to do with accuracy or if it has to do simply with sensitivity for certain issues, towards certain topics,” Ryan said.

Professor of Economics Rob Catlett is a member of the American Association of University Professors, a national organization dedicated to maintaining principles fundamental to academic freedom. Catlett said that the AAUP has dealt with student media related issues in the past, and would offer advice, if it was requested, regarding this situation.

“If a faculty member or administration wants our assistance, all they need to do is ask, and we want to do that as professionally as we know how,” Catlett said. “Somebody could contact me, somebody can contact other members of the AAUP, and we will direct them to somebody that can listen to their situation and provide an independent judgment….

We are committed to these higher level principles that guide universities and we want it known that we’re willing to act as professional intermediary,” Catlett said. “We’re not on the side of faculty members, we’re not on the side of the administration, we’re on the side of these basic fundamental principles.”

Miller believes that communication should be the first step in alleviating this issue.

“That’s not untypical of academic discussions, the problem being that if you are not face to face with people talking about things or second hand or fourth hand, that in that translation, things unintentionally become different,” Miller said. “I honestly believe that everybody is doing the best they can to get this cleared up.”

However, direct communication between the administration and the Editor-In-Chief of The Bulletin has yet to occur.

“I don’t think there’s any chance for resolution until President Lane agrees to meet with me,” said Kelsey Ryan, junior political science major and Editor-in-Chief of The Bulletin. “If there was any miscommunication, I feel it could have been avoided if the administration had just communicated directly. Until that time, there is no way to mend this ‘adversarial’ relationship.”

Sarah Shaw/The Bulletin

Send article as PDF to