Editorial: Freedom of speech, where is the line?

The amount of free speech that should be allowed has always been more than a rhetorical question.

The University of Toledo recently enacted a new free speech policy on campus. The new policy focuses mainly on the logistics, hashing out issues like making sure people expressing free speech don’t stop others from getting to their cars or classes. We feel like the university’s policy is reasonable and a definitive step in the right direction. However, the topic prompted the editorial staff at The Independent Collegian to go in a different direction and discuss the line between freedom of speech and harassment.

The issue is important to us, not only from a theoretical standpoint, but as a founding principle of our organization. To us, censorship isn’t just an abstract, scary concept. In 2000, then-university president Vikram Kapoor tried to gain control of the editorial board and dictate our content. Because our right to print the truth freely was important to us, we chose to separate from the university and become The Independent Collegian.

Because of the value we place on it, we believe in a liberal application of free expression rights. Essentially, people should be allowed to say whatever they want as long as it isn’t directly targeting or endangering a specific person or group of people. After all, no free speech policy will make a difference on the fact that college policies should never allow bullying.

It might sound like an easy concept to get on board with, but true freedom of speech isn’t always fun. Sometimes it means having to endure listening to or seeing things that might be sexist, racist, homophobic or even just plain wrong. An example of this happened last year: the controversial ‘Viva Hugo Chavez’ signs were posted and then torn down on the free speech board.

Advocating for allowing people to be horrible isn’t always popular, but it’s necessary. Even well-intentioned censorship is still censorship. The second you point at one group or one idea and say ‘This isn’t allowed,’ you’re opening up the possibility for that same treatment to be applied to any group administration might take issue with.

For those who feel that philosophical correctness doesn’t always offer comfort when you’re walking past a sign seething in anger or disgust, we offer a solution.

Be responsible for the messages on your own campus. In the same way someone has the freedom to post signs that say something awful, you have the same freedom to post signs affirming or defending people. If you see a message that bothers you, then choose to confront it instead of rolling your eyes and walking away. Don’t allow the loudest voices to be the cruelest ones.

UT makes the policies, but it’s up to the students, the faculty, and the staff to decide how to take advantage of them. A fair policy presents an opportunity to make use of it, and an unfair policy presents the opportunity to open dialogue, as UT students already did after the protest last fall.

In other words, if you don’t like the way someone’s using their right to free speech, then use yours.