Skidmarks: The Best of the Brown and White – Volume 2
In reference to the Lehigh bookstore manager’s alleged destruction of several Brown and White’s:
“… Free speech took a big step backward because someone didn’t like it when a student dared speak out against what he saw as a discriminatory policy. Just because something makes you or your company look bad doesn’t mean it should be silenced or negated. Take a look at some comments on the Brown and White’s Web site for evidence of that.”
Interestingly, and hypocritically, The Brown and White does not allow comments to contain links to any outside websites (or “Web sites” if you are the B&W edit board) in a clear attempt to restrict the dialogue on campus. The Patriot was unable to find any reputable news source with a similar policy. This, in addition to the Brown and White’s policy of screening comments before they are posted combines for a much more egregious violation of the spirit of the First Amendment than a book store manager allegedly ripping up a few Brown and White’s.
From the latest rehashed editorial bemoaning printing usage at Lehigh:
“But this is not a privilege we should abuse. We are all guilty of it because it’s not something we usually think about, but next time you go to print, think about how much paper you waste.
Sure, we are used to having a copy of our assignments in front of us when we read, but is it so bad to have to read from a screen? Between our computers and televisions, we spend most of the day in front of a screen anyway. What’s the difference?”
While the Brown and White calls on you to ‘think before you print,’ the Patriot editorial board would like to ask the Brown and White to ’think before you write.’ Since you can easily read all of the Brown and White’s articles online, there should not be any reason for an actual paper copy of the Brown and White according to this editorial. We would be very interested to know how much paper is used in printing several thousand copies of the Brown and White each week, and why their editorial board feels justified in killing so many trees.
Lehigh’s practical jokes still lack sophistication.
“Most of campus fondly remembers awakening on Flagpole day to find a Nazi flag firmly planted atop the flagpole.”
Fifty-two years ago, The Brown and White had a much more relaxed approach to swastikas appearing on campus. Such an event today would likely evoke about eight e-mails from President Gast and her administrative cohorts, a town hall meeting to “heal the community,” a police investigation, and various demands from various special interest groups around campus.
Just a few questions to further understand the points you’re trying to make.
1. How are you qualified to determine which “violation of the spirit of free speech” is a higher priority than another?
2. You have print copies of The Patriot? I’m holding one right now, so that’s a rather hypocritical point to make, correct?
3. What does response to a swastika practical joke have to do with The Brown and White? All the examples you cite – eight e-mails, town hall meetings, police investigations and demands from special interest groups – have nothing to do with The Brown and White. They simply cover whatever response occurs.
Mr. fjdkalfs,
1. The Skidmarks column is not making a judgment on which violation has higher priority. Indeed, I’d say its obvious that both are violations – to what degree is an individual’s choice. Nevertheless, criticizing one violation of free speech while violating it another way is hypocritical. The Patriot promotes free speech and an open forum of discussion. Should you ever see us violating those principles, let us know.
2. When have you heard the Patriot tell you to save the environment by printing less? The problem is not in the act of printing, it’s the hypocrisy.
3. We aren’t necessairly criticizing the Brown and White’s response in either case. We simply were pointing out a response that, due to the change in culture of Lehigh’s campus, is quite different from what we would see today.
Thanks for your comment.
Ben