First there was this the other day on The Torch:
As we reported in a press release this morning, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is threatening a student with discipline for a comment he posted on Facebook.com. The student was a member of a now-defunct Facebook.com group formed in response to a movement to get rid of Illinois’ Native American mascot, “Chief Illiniwek.” The group called itself “If They Get Rid of the Chief I’m Becoming a Racist,” and the student in question posted the following comment:Apparently the leader of this movement is of Sioux descent. Which means what, you ask? The Sioux indians [sic] are the ones that killed off the Illini indians [sic], so she’s just trying to finish off what her ancestors started. I say we throw a tomohawk [sic] into her face.
It should be obvious that rather than attempting to incite a tomahawk attack on campus, this student was simply registering his extreme displeasure using the type of over-the-top, hyperbolic language favored by students nationwide (for example, a quick search of Facebook.com groups at my alma mater reveals the existence of groups such as “Every Facebook Group Should End With Bitch…Bitch”; “MOL 214 Makes Me Want to Punch a Baby in the Face…and I LOVE Babies”; and “Stalking is the Sincerest Form of Flattery.”)
Rather then giving this student the benefit of the doubt, however, the university launched an investigation into what Chancellor Richard Herman termed the “violent” and “vicious” threats.
As a U of I alum I read this with interest, but I merely rolled my eyes at yet another dumb chapter in the always dumb Chief Illiniwek controversy.
But I should have seen it as the golden oportunity it was.
From today at The Torch:
Upon receipt of a FIRE press release, FIRE friend David Ross e-mails the university administrator in question and asks a simple question: Are FIRE’s allegations accurate?
Following FIRE’s latest press release regarding the “tomahawk threat” at Illinois, Prof. Ross wrote to Chancellor Herman:You, Chancellor Herman, may really think that this silly student actually intended to threaten a tomahawk attack! Certainly that’s what you indicated in your email regarding this matter. Do you really think that the student threatened an actual attack?
If the student really were threatening to attack someone with a tomahawk then taking action against that student would not be a violation of the first amendment—by which UI is bound because it is a government school. The first amendment does not protect threats of physical harm. But in that case, your response is insanely mild! If you think, Chancellor Herman, that one student plans to attack another with an ax, you have to call the cops! How do you suppose parents of UI students will feel when they learn that the administration, upon concluding that an ax attack on a student was imminent, snapped into action and distributed an email about “creating a more welcoming campus environment”?
I'm kicking myself for not having thought of this yesterday.
However, there is always the danger that the Chancellor will be obtuse enough to take Prof. Ross up on this and sic the cops on the student.
Wouldn't that make for a "welcoming campus enviornment"!
ADDED:
How is it college adminstrators have so much time for cruising around Facebook and MySpace? What, the day job isn't really filling up your work day?
No comments:
Post a Comment