Opinion: Editorial
Here’s a Pointer: Free speech matters
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- Oh, Danny boy... (October 19, 2009)
- Represent! (October 15, 2009)
- Beer tax makes cents (October 15, 2009)
- Talk now, restructure later (October 13, 2009)
- A second Wynd (October 4, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
University of Wisconsin-Madison students are frequently reminded of the phrase coined by the Board of Regents in 1894: “…the great state University of Wisconsin should ever encourage that continual and fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone the truth can be found.”
Apparently those words never made it north.
Last week, the Advance-Titan of UW-Oshkosh and The Pointer of UW-Stevens Point chose not to run an advertisement from the Human Life Alliance, an anti-abortion group. The ad, a 12-page insert, contained reasonable messages intended to educate students about their recommendations for coping with an unwanted pregnancy without destroying innocent life. It also contained more questionable messages, such as claiming that abortions increase a woman’s chances of breast cancer.
The Advance-Titan didn’t run the advertisement because, to quote Editor in Chief Andrew Munger, it did not “provide a service of any sort, just an ideology.” Pointer Editor in Chief Jacob Mathias shared those sentiments, but added his staff also intended to avoid controversy.
Mr. Munger is dead wrong. This insert would have provided a service — a stimulating discussion about abortion among college students, who tend to be pro-choice. And if The Pointer staff and Mr. Mathias chose not to run the ad because of the “controversy” it may have caused, they are cowards.
Pro-Life Wisconsin, the anti-abortion advocacy group that offered HLA’s ad insert, seems to think these newspapers are showing a “bias” against its viewpoints. But since Mr. Mathis said he himself is pro-life, this is much worse than a bias — it is an embarrassment to journalism. The decision was made independently of the newspaper’s funding source, namely UW-Stevens Point.
Newspapers exist to perform many functions, one of which includes serving as a public forum. The Badger Herald has received its fair share of intimidation in the past for running ads that have caused “controversy” - the MultiCultural Student Coalition still boycotts us for a David Horowitz ad we ran nearly a decade ago that slammed reparations for slavery.
But we know it is the job of a newspaper to make sure all voices are heard, not just the ones our audience wants to hear. This is even truer as a college newspaper.
We, like our colleagues in Oshkosh and Stevens Point, have a responsibility to the students, staff and faculty of our campuses to provide all sides of an argument in an effort to promote a healthy learning environment — whether that be by running a variety of opinion columns or running advertisements from interested parties. This includes material that might prove extremely offensive to some parties.
That is what “sifting and winnowing” means. And we hope the Advance-Titan and Pointer keep that in mind.
16 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
IP hash: 85ae2de9
A simulating discussion? Oh, like college kids don’t know they can’t give up kids for adoption. No, I disagree, this is not “free speech,” this insert is obnoxious, close minded, self-righteous, and politically inspired. I think the “anti-abortion” folks are too focused on abortion used as birth control, but ignore the instances when it’s medically necessary.
Perhaps we should debate the holocaust, or print a full page confederate flag in all the newspapers? Then we could have a stimulating discussion over something that doesn’t need debated. Roe v. Wade is law, the holocaust happened, and anyone waving a confederate flag is an asshole.
IP hash: 54dcb615
Abortion causes breast cancer? That’s like saying listening to the Mamas & Papas causes incest.
IP hash: 3412785f
“But we know it is the job of a newspaper to make sure all voices are heard, not just the ones our audience wants to hear.”
The job of a newspaper to select the kind of content the owners of the paper deem valuable. You may not like the content they select, but it is NOT their job to cater to all voices.
“sifting and winnowing” means pursuing knowledge by critical evaluation, it does not mean that every newspaper must provide a forum to air one’s ideas.
IP hash: 5e739dc9
@12:23
That’s true, sifting and winnowing means using critical evaluation to look at ideas. But there was no critical evaluation here—both newspapers just said they didn’t think ideals should be published in an ad, and one EIC said he didn’t want to cause controversy.
Sure, it’s their right to make that decision. But by doing so they skirted their responsibility to the public, and the more often newspapers do that, the more irrelevant they become.
IP hash: 34f51f46
I think all puppies should be placed into wood chippers. Could I get a full page in the BH to better explain my position? I will not be silenced!
IP hash: cc534330
Nice piece Ed. Board. Whether you agree with the issue or not it’s important to have varying viewpoints heard.
And @7:39am, Roe v. Wade is subject to judicial overturning like any other case. It’s not an event like the Holocaust, nor is it a symbol representing a cause fought over a hundred and forty some odd years ago. Roe v. Wade is very recent history and therefore is still up for interpretation, and that’s what makes it different from your other topics and plausible for a stimulating discussion. I, personally, have had several great conversations regarding abortion with my more religious-minded friends (yes, folks some people still do have faith as a central tenant in their lives) and the conversation has been educational for the both of us.
Whether you agree with the issue or not, an educated opinion cannot be formed without hearing both sides of the argument. Forming a conclusion with only parts of the information or theory is irresponsible.
IP hash: 85ae2de9
Roe v. Wade was a decision made in 1973, which was 36 years ago. Thirty-six years of precedence, thirty-six years of trial, and you still insist that this is “recent.” What’s there to debate?
With this “debate,” the underlying motive is suspect. Do most people actually care about crack whores’ unborn children never gasping their first breath? No. Perhaps they are upset that the federal government usurped states’ rights, and that they’re paying too many taxes to Uncle Sam. Hmmm.
Perhaps we should debate Federalism in Christian’s clothing. Perhaps we should point out the unwitting church folk who have been mislead for political gain. Tax cuts for the rich, and self righteousness for everyone else. Suckers.
IP hash: 0f1d6bc5
Everyone complaining here needs to get a clue and actually think before you type. If an organization wants to provide information and pay for that information to be provided, and provides facts that college students won’t get from the mass secular media, a small group of people can’t decide that it would be “controversial” to print it and not do so. That is the ultimate violation of free speech. What’s next, a newspaper won’t publish event information of a Republican convention in Madison because 2/3 of the city is liberal? Get a clue!
To respond to people’s comments, a growing number of studies suggest that women who have an abortion have a higher risk of getting breast cancer in the future. Abortion doesn’t cause breast cancer, but it can increase the risk of getting it. http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/abc.html
Boy, I hope my comments get published, as I just provided a link that could cause controversy…
“You may not like the content they select, but it is NOT their job to cater to all voices.” Um, yes it is, “Anonymous.” If they only cater to a certain group of people, they only get subscriptions and sell newspapers to that group, and not a wide range of groups. From a profitability standpoint, it would be wise to cater to a wide selection of people to max their distribution, not just cover the lopsided news YOU want to read about. Because then, how would you know anything about the other side to have a reasonable debate?
IP hash: 5e11bbf8
The First Amendment was not written for those you agree with—it was written for those you disagree with. More information is better than less so informed decisions can be made. Where’s the pro-choice crowd when the choice involves Free Speech? Be careful of what you want to eliminate because of your personal preference—the next time it may be your own freedom of speech that will be eliminated.
IP hash: a844f74f
How much to run a photo of hardcore anal intercourse in the Herald? You know, to get the debate going.
IP hash: 8356a4cb
Depending on how big you want it prices for a reasonable (couple inches) sized photo would be about $100
IP hash: 3402cb20
Free speech doesn’t apply to paid advertisements.
IP hash: ac97c425
All of you liberal college students know that the main reason (even though you would not admit to it) that you want a choice is due to your promiscuity (or hopes of it) and don’t want to take repsponsibilty for the possible results. You should not be able to make bad decisions and then just sweep a life under the rug to cover them up!! With that being said….I am not opposed to abortion if the mother’s life is at stake or in the cases of rape. In those cases, who is qualified to judge which life is more important?
IP hash: 4484a00d
Get off your high horse Badger Herald.
IP hash: 0f8ea229
Actually, 12:54, my abortions have nothing to do with my promiscuity. I have abortions because I really, really, really love fetus tacos.
IP hash: ac97c425
Ha…well in a way they do, because your love for fetus tacos probably leads to promiscuity!