In 1735 a German immigrant and printer, John Zenger, was brought before the colonial courts of New York on charges of libel for having printed in his newspaper articles and editorials criticizing the governor of New York. His trial was contentious from the start, after the governor attempted to stack the jury and dismissed his lawyers. The lawyer, who eventually defended Zenger, urged in most eloquent terms to the jury that the press has:
“A right publicly to remonstrate against the abuses of power in the strongest terms, to put their neighbors upon their guard against the craft or open violence of men in authority”
Zenger was acquitted by the jury, and his case set a precedence for freedom of the press that was eventually enshrined in the constitution of our great nation. Today, you may be asked to consider the validity of the paper, the truthfulness of my statements and the quality and professionalism of The Broadside. While these are valid concerns that any publication must ask of itself, and must allow others to ask as well, it is not one that should be raised when addressing the present issue. The editorials I wrote that day were true when we went to press. ASCOCC in trying to suppress this editorial and issuing statements condemning myself and The Broadside at their weekly meeting is merely the latest in a broad reaching campaign to suppress freedom, liberty and the autonomy of The Broadside. And because we are Americans, governed under the constitution, the supremacy of the first Amendment and whether it applies to this situation and my editorial is one which you ultimately will be asked to consider.
The editorial entitled, “It pays to love ASCOCC,” appeared on page 3 of the Feb. 3, 2010 issue of The Broadside. Due to an unfortunate layout and design mistake, the two editorials I wrote, criteria about letters to the editor, and several statements by students addressing things they either hate or love about our school, appeared under a folio entitled News. This is an unfortunate and egregious mistake and one which we issued a correction for in today’s paper. However, any reasonably intelligent person would after reading only the first few sentences of both editorials on that page would be able to discern that they were in fact editorials and not strictly news articles. Having printed a correction I feel that ASCOCC and Mr. Robert L. Walker III cannot reasonably ask for anything more. Mistakes happen and this is one I am willing to accept responsibility for.
The facts printed in the editorial are true. On Jan. 29, 2010 I attended ASCOCC’s weekly council meeting, during which Mr. Robert L. Walker III’s contract came up for review. Mr. Walker had requested a sum of $3000 for videos he would be making for ASCOCC during the spring term. The contract was discussed by members of the council. Mr. Price suggested that before paying Mr. Walker they write into his contract what exactly he would be expected to perform and not pay him until such work was completed. He also suggested paying him at an hourly rate. Ms. Pierce stated that due to the long hours involved in producing videos it would not be viable to pay Mr. Walker an hourly rate. It was suggested then to reduce his hours and pay him at an hourly rate. Mr. Link stated that before any decisions about Mr. Walker’s contract were made, that they discuss it with him and it was agreed by members to table the contract until next week’s meeting.
ASCOCC’s statement says that Ms. Pierce recused herself from the issue. She however made no statement recusing herself during the meeting and was an active participant during the discussion involving the contract.
ASCOCC’s statement says that “prior to Don Iler’s article being released… council members rejected [Robert L. Walker’s III] original contract proposal, decreased his workload, amount of hours and hired him as an honorary member.” This may have happened, but it occurred outside of a regular meeting that had an agenda posted and which the press was informed of, which is illegal according to Oregon Public Meeting Law, which ASCOCC is governed under.
Mr. Walker states in his email that he completed more work than the five 30 second clips I cited in my editorial. This may be the case; however, the amount cited was based on videos that were readily accessible to the public. We also cited this in the correction in today’s paper.
It is true that I did not interview Ms. Pierce or Mr. Walker in connection with this editorial. However, an interview at the time was unfeasible and unnecessary given the goal of the editorial.
When I wrote the editorial later in the afternoon on Jan. 29, it was under the thought that Mr. Walker’s contract would not be decided upon until the next week and after discussing what happened at the meeting with members of The Broadside’s editorial board, we decided that it was newsworthy and important enough to bring it immediately to press. We decided the large amount of money involved and the nepotism and possible corruption the contract entailed deserved the editorial attention of The Broadside. We thought that our readers would appreciate hearing about this contract and perhaps they would be led to attend the next council meeting and make their opinion and voice be heard. Because this meeting eventually happened illegally, outside of the parameters of Oregon Public Meeting Law, it is unfortunate that the public did not truly get to benefit from the editorial. However, students are now aware that ASCOCC has no qualms about nepotism and hiring friends for high paying jobs.
Yes, normally a newspaper would publish an editorial in conjunction with a news article. But given the time and space constraints and our desire to get the news and our opinion out about it, I wrote only an editorial. However, this does not diminish the fact that what is contained in the editorial is true even though it is written in conjunction with my own personal opinion.
The statement issued by ASCOCC brings up an incident Mr. Walker had with Erin Marlowe while working for The Broadside. I was not aware of this incident and was not a student at this school at the time because I was in the Marine Corps serving in Iraq. Bringing this up in the statement is odd and has nothing to do with my actions. I am fully responsible for the content in The Broadside. I am fully responsible for the editorial I wrote. Bringing up an old beef against advisor Erin Marlowe is unnecessary and appears petty.
What is written is factual. It is also an editorial. Moreover, if ASCOCC does not like the content of it, perhaps they should think before they act next time.
ASCOCC has consistently tried to marginalize The Broadside. Last spring, ASCOCC refused requests to raise The Broadside’s budget even though they had no qualms about raising their own salaries. When I first joined the staff and was placed on a beat to cover ASCOCC, I was greeted by defensive council members who were unwilling to divulge information and documents. It took several days and talking to Gordon Price to merely get a copy of their constitution, bylaws and budget from them. Members have consistently been unwilling to talk with The Broadside, have not shared information with us about their events while at the same time complaining about us not covering their events. Terry Link has refused to ever be interviewed by me again. ASCOCC has expressed that it would like to have its own section in the paper and to dictate The Broadside’s content. On Jan. 27, I was told by Ms. Pierce that she was not happy with what we had been writing, and just because they weren’t responding to us doesn’t mean they believed what we wrote was true. She then told me that The Broadside was unimportant and misrepresented the truth. On Feb. 3, ASCOCC posted on its Facebook page an update about stating,
“Looking for fact-based stories about events, activities, clubs and programs on campus? Keep an eye out for the new ASCOCC Magazine, “The Voice” coming soon!
ASCOCC has moved forward towards creating another on campus publication controlled solely by ASCOCC. On Feb. 5, ASCOCC issued a statement calling for “internal consequences” to befall me, and honorary member Mr. Walker has called for my suspension.
An elected student government cannot dictate the content of an independent newspaper. Student government should not have the final say, without any avenue for appeal, about our budget. The government should expect to be criticized and should respect the independence of the press. The Broadside will not tow the party line and will not be ASCOCC’s propaganda sheet.
The first Amendment of the United States constitution states that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” For five years of my life, I honorably served in the United States Marine Corps and upon enlisting, I swore an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution. I took that oath seriously, and the freedoms and responsibilities contained in that document I hold close to my heart. I love my country and ever since a teacher put a copy of the constitution in my lap many years ago, I realized that my nation was great for guaranteeing those things which are most important for a democratic and free society. One reason I am so proud of my country and why I so emphatically believe that ASCOCC is wrong in demanding retraction of the article and my removal from office, is because of the freedoms the first amendment grants me. If ASCOCC can trample all over the United States Constitution, what is to stop other officials in higher positions of power from doing the same? If The Broadside must live in fear from ASCOCC and suffer the condemning statements it issues, what sort of country do we live in?
Government in America simply does not dictate what the press prints. There is precedence for this, dating all the way back to 1735 and John Zenger. The 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights states “That the freedom of the press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty and can never be restrained but by despotic governments.” The Declaration of independence states, “Men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among them, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The First amendment guarantees the freedom of the press and countless Supreme Court decisions have upheld this important freedom over the years. I, as editor in chief of The Broadside am guaranteed the same rights and privileges.
I wrote those things because they are true. I wrote those things because I will not be intimidated by a student government that seeks to repress The Broadside. I wrote those things because I am protected by the United States constitution and have the assuring knowledge that many men and women far greater than I am died defending, upholding and securing those freedoms.
The loss of liberty is a fate worse than death, yet there have been people in power throughout history who have sought to repress freedom and dissenting voices. As intelligent people, as human beings, and as freedom loving Americans, I urge you to not allow the press to be suppressed, to not allow dissenting voices to be quieted and to not allow government run all over the inalienable rights guaranteed us as citizens.
America is a great country. And you today have a chance to up hold one of our greatest institutions, the freedom of the press.
0 Responses to “Take that student government!”