We at the Graphic firmly believe in freedom of speech. Think for a second what the press would be without the freedom of speech that we so richly enjoy in this country. Think what the press would be if it had to undergo strict government censure before every printing. Think what the press would be if there was someone telling us at every twist and turn what we could and could not print, regardless of its factual validity but based solely on the fact that a governing body could. To say the very least, this is bad press.
And so we value freedom of speech, and in turn we very much value forums in which people can speak their minds and share their opinions directly and without the fear of censure. If we did not value these things, what would we be but hypocrites of the highest order?
Theoretically, the Freedom Wall here at Pepperdine was created for the very thing that we journalists hold so dear to our hearts — the freedom of expression, regardless of the message and the medium. Put more simply, the Freedom Wall is the one forum here at Pepperdine that allows us to publicly use our right to freedom of speech: this is a good thing.
On any given day, one can find flyers urging more cultural awareness, aid relief in the Third World and even funny quips and one-liners aimed at our country’s fine leaders. Again, this is a good thing.
But more often than not, the Freedom Wall is not used for such good intentions. For all the positive things that are said and posted on the Freedom Wall, there are many more crude, rude and ignorant things posted. These are the kinds of things that give people the ammunition to fight against freedom of speech. More often than not, instead of thought-provoking, community-building and challenging words being posted on the Freedom Wall, what stands out the most are the crass and vulgar words sprawled in plain view.
During the fall election this was almost always the case: someone would post reasons to vote for one candidate over the other, and within hours those things would turn into a nasty contest to see which candidate could be slammed harder. A simple “Vote (insert particular political candidate here)” sign would suddenly display the wonderful tag “your candidate is a (insert profanity here)” that would then be followed by the similar, “No, well your candidate is a dirty, scum-sucking …” and so on.
How is this in any way constructive, positive or helpful? It is not that free speech always has to be positive or helpful — the reality is far from that. But at the same time, in a public forum dedicated to protecting our right to express to ourselves, these types of posts and words do nothing but harm.
Of course, we firmly believe that everyone has the right to say what they want — that is the essence of the freedom of speech that we love so much in this country. But we also watch our words closely — theoretically, we can say whatever we want, but we do not.
We appreciate our right to say what we want, but we pay attention to the constructiveness of our comments — and this is what we want for the Freedom Wall as well.
The Freedom Wall can be a great thing. It can be a place where people can really be comfortable to express who they are and their beliefs. It can be a place to start a revolution or maybe even a place to post a “date for Friday night wanted” advertisement. Either way, the Freedom Wall can be a useful, beneficial part of the community.
Nobody is going to sit and watch as people come by and write and post on the Freedom Wall, then censor it when they are gone we hope. But to get the most out of the Freedom Wall — to use it for what it is really there for — we need to be willing to be mature and positive in our comments. We need to be willing to disagree without bashing those who hold beliefs that are different from our own. We need to be willing to show grace and maturity.
The freedom to speak is a great and beautiful thing. We should be mature enough to know how to use that right without abusing it.
2-24-2005