果冻传媒app官方

Table of Contents

Mohammed Cartoon Controversy Sweeps the Academy

果冻传媒app官方
PHILADELPHIA, February 22, 2006鈥擳he global controversy over cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed has now struck American college campuses. In response, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (果冻传媒app官方) issued a statement today reminding colleges and universities that free speech needs protection now鈥攊n the face of ongoing controversy鈥攎ore than ever.
 
鈥淚t is when expression is most hotly contested and the calls for suppression are the loudest that we must defend liberty the most fervently,鈥 said FIREInterim President Greg Lukianoff. 鈥淚 am reminded of the infinitely wise words of Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson: 鈥楩reedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.鈥欌
 
FIRE鈥檚 statement stresses that the First Amendment unquestionably protects printing and posting the infamous cartoons. It also points out that while fear of violent reprisal could be an impetus for censoring the cartoons, 鈥渇ear must not lead universities to forget that their primary duty is to defend the rights of students and faculty to hold and express their opinions, not placate those who would silence them.鈥 The statement goes on to explain that universities have both a 鈥渘egative鈥 duty not to censor the cartoons as well as a 鈥減ositive鈥 duty to protect speakers from being censored by others.
 
Although censorship in response to displays of the cartoons has been rare, it has indeed occurred. At Century College in Minnesota, adjunct professor of geography Karen Murdock posted the 12 original cartoons, articles about the resultant international controversy, and comment sheets on a bulletin board near her office. After the cartoons were anonymously torn down several times, Murdock reported that her division head removed the cartoons and a university administrator requested that she not repost them.
 
Some Muslim students also wrote a letter saying they were 鈥渉eartbroken鈥 to see that Murdock had posted the cartoons, claiming that 鈥淸d]uring the last week, this incident had a very negative impact on our ability to concentrate on our studies.鈥 While no disciplinary action was taken against Murdock, she has not reposted the cartoons out of fear of possible fallout. She told 果冻传媒app官方, 鈥淲hen a division chairman and a college vice president both tell an untenured adjunct professor that something should not be posted on a bulletin board, this is a suggestion that has the force of a direct order. The cartoons would still be posted if I felt that I had a say in the matter.鈥
 
At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, student editors Acton Gorton and Chuck Prochaska printed six of the original 12 cartoons in the independent student paper The Daily Illini. The Chicago Tribune reported on February 14 that the Illini鈥檚 board of directors, composed of staff and students, dismissed Gorton and Prochaska for failing to consult with 鈥渙ther student editors and staff members鈥 in making the decision to print the cartoons. The paper then ran an editorial apologizing for printing the cartoons and calling Gorton 鈥渁 renegade editor who firmly believes that his will is also the will of the paper.鈥
 
The Chicago Maroon reported on February 17 that an anonymous University of Chicago student hung a homemade sketch of Mohammed with a caption reading 鈥淢o鈥 Mohammed, Mo鈥 Problems鈥 outside his dorm room. After receiving a complaint about the sketch, Resident Head Andrea Gates ordered it removed and reported the student who had posted it to the Housing Office for a possible investigation. The student removed the sketch and issued a written apology. The university has taken no further action, and FIREcontinues to investigate the situation.
 
Similarly, at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), student Mitchell Foley reported to FIREthat he had posted the 12 cartoons on his dorm room door until his resident assistant told him to remove them. He removed the cartoons and has not reposted them; RPI has not commented on the situation.
 
There have also been various instances of student papers running the cartoons with little to no reaction from administrators. Student papers at the University of Wisconsin鈥揗adison, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Purdue University, the University of Arizona, Northern Illinois University, and Harvard University have all printed the original cartoons, or their own versions depicting the prophet, without official consequence.
 
鈥淣o one should deny the student press鈥 freedom to publish these cartoons,鈥 Lukianoff concluded. 鈥淎dministrators have the right to criticize newspaper decisions鈥攁s does every American鈥攂ut this criticism cannot and must not be parlayed into censorship.鈥
 
FIRE works on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation鈥檚 colleges and universities, and urges people to report any instances of censorship of these cartoons on college campuses at thefire.org/resources/submit-a-case. 果冻传媒app官方鈥檚 efforts to preserve freedom of expression on college campuses across the country during the cartoon controversy can be viewed at thefire.org/cartoons.
 
CONTACT:

Greg Lukianoff, Interim President, 果冻传媒app官方: 215-717-3473; greg_lukianoff@thefire.org

Recent Articles

FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share