Author Archives: Prof. Kovarik

RU Free Speech protest May 1

Posted on by

To protest Radford University policies restricting freedom of speech on campus, students and faculty rallied outside the Hurlburt student on May 1, 2013.

With the Faculty Senate, the Council of Deans and the Student Government Association all demanding reform of RU’s archaic prior restraint policies, and legal analysis showing clear faults in the policies, the RU administration has consistently shown bad faith in refusing to discuss issues.

The highlight of the protest was the signing of a large poster by dozens of students (right in the first photo) and an attempt by Prof. Kovarik to hand a flyer to Ken Bonk, the administrator who is in charge of enforcing anti-free speech policies at RU. Not only did Bonk refuse to accept the flyer, but he fled rapidly into the building while shouting something about errors in the flyer that he refused to discuss.

Protest2a.may1

The crew of the May 1 protest (photo by Prof. Martin, who was also present).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonk.onthe.run

Ken Bonk flees from Prof. Kovarik, who is attempting to hand him a flyer about Free Speech rights on campus, during the May 1 protest.

 

Frat signs? No problem for Lexington

Posted on by

Frat.Lex.OXPh Frat.Lex.EAE Frat.Lexington

On a spring day in Lexington, Va., fraternity row openly sports Greek letters without any apparent unease from town officials. In fact, two of these houses are across the street from the police station.   The “animal house” fraternity is around the corner.  Just how similar signs might — in some imaginary universe — represent a threat to the peace and dignity of the City of Radford is one of life’s mysteries.  Yet the city persists not only in maintaing its unconstitutional fraternity sign ban,  but also in refusing to discuss the issues.

AAUP flyer on the May 1 protest

Posted on by

This is the American Association of University Professors flyer which The First Amendment / Higher Education class did not create.  However, who would argue that the AAUP does not have every right to create and distribute this flyer on campus?   Is it overstated?  Obviously.  But  sometimes that’s the point of the “vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials” protected in the New York Times v Sullivan decision.    — Prof. Kovarik.

prisonerRU: PRISON CAMP ON THE NEW

(1) “Free speech zones” that limit speech to tiny designated areas.

(2) Censorship of all postings on bulletin boards for faculty and students, requiring pre-stamping.

(3)  Censorship of everything posted in the dorms.

(4) Offering only about 12 “public” bulletin boards (limited to pre-stamped postings) on the entire campus located in out of the way places where students rarely go like the basement of Heth Hall.

(5)  Tight control of all email lists (but open to commercial interests).

(6) Prohibition of anyone handing out flyers or other materials anywhere on campus except from pre-approved tables in and around the Bonnie.

(7)  Collaboration with the city to limit the signs students can place on student housing.

[Co-sponsored by RU Chapter of the AAUP]

PROTEST FOR YOUR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH IN A FREE SOCIETY

Mayday:  Wed. May 1st

Bonnie Plaza 10 AM to 1

 

National journalism teachers group opposes censorship

Posted on by

The Board of Directors of AEJMC declares that no legitimate pedagogical purpose is served by the censorship of student journalism even if it reflects unflatteringly on school policies and programs, candidly discusses sensitive social and political issues, or voices opinions challenging to majority views on matters of public concern. The censorship of such speech is detrimental to effective learning and teaching, and it cannot be justified by reference to “pedagogical concerns.”

 

The full text of the resolution and press release follows:
For Immediate Release
April 2, 2013

Contact:
Dr. Kyu Ho Youm, AEJMC President
(541) 346-2178
youm@uoegon.edu

The Board of Directors of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) recently passed a resolution regarding the 25th Anniversary of the Supreme Court significantly reducing the level of First Amendment protection afforded to students’ journalistic speech in the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier.

In the ruling, the Court’s 5-3 majority concluded that schools could lawfully censor student expressions in non-public forum media for any “legitimate pedagogical purpose,” and that among the recognized lawful purposes was the elimination of speech tending to “associate the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of political controversy”.

AEJMC President Kyu Ho Youm of the University of Oregon explains, “Being keenly aware of this year as the 25th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the AEJMC Board of Directors expresses its increasing concern about the negative impact of the case on freedom of the student press. This is all the more so, when the case has been expanded far enough to apply to the college press over the past 16 years. As the leading national organization of postsecondary journalism and mass communication educators, AEJMC wishes to express its strong stand on the unwarranted abuse of Hazelwood as an easy tool of censorship against student journalists on all levels, including that of colleges and universities”.

Resolution:
In recognition of society’s increased reliance on student news-gatherers to fulfill basic community information needs, and the importance of unfiltered information about the performance of educational institutions,

In recognition of the well-documented misapplication of Hazelwood censorship authority to impede the teaching of professional journalistic values and practices, which include the willingness to question the performance of governance institutions,

In recognition that the primary concern of the Supreme Court in Hazelwood was to permit schools to restrict editorial content “unsuitable for immature audiences”, a concern inapplicable at the postsecondary level.

In recognition of the combined 150 years’ experience of states with statutory student free-press guarantees, demonstrating that the Hazelwood level of administrative control is unnecessary for the advancement of legitimate educational objectives,

Be it resolved that:
The Board of Directors of AEJMC declares that no legitimate pedagogical purpose is served by the censorship of student journalism even if it reflects unflatteringly on school policies and programs, candidly discusses sensitive social and political issues, or voices opinions challenging to majority views on matters of public concern. The censorship of such speech is detrimental to effective learning and teaching, and it cannot be justified by reference to “pedagogical concerns.”

Be it further resolved that:
The AEJMC Board of Directors declares that the Hazelwood level of control over student journalistic and editorial expression is incompatible with the effective teaching of journalistic skills, values and practices at the collegiate level, and that institutions of postsecondary education should forswear reliance on Hazelwood as a legitimate source of authority for the governance of student and educator expression.

The rise of the administrative university

Posted on by

By Glen Martin, for the RU AAUP, Oct. 2012

Books are beginning to appear about the nation-wide conversion of universities away from institutions dedicated to truth and knowledge and into a business model of education.  One such book is by Benjamin Ginsberg called The Fall of the Faculty: The Rise of the All-Administrative University and Why it Matters (2011). Ginsberg chronicles the demise of academic freedom, tenure, and the traditional faculty-driven conception of a quality curriculum and the independent pursuit of truth.

Continue reading →

Plaid avenger strikes again!

Posted on by

Plaid.photoMonday, Feb. 18, 2013.

  • 07:30 — Sharp eyed university censors notice half a dozen unauthorized communications chalked into sidewalks. “#PlaidSwag” looks suspicious.  Superiors notified.
  • 09:30 — University censorship action group (UCAG) concludes that a non-cyber information attack is underway.
  • 9:45 — Vehicles parked over information attack sites to deter spread of dangerous ideas.
  • 10:00 — Criminal incident information recorded.
  • 10:15 — University powerwashing crews swiftly deployed.
  • 10:45 — Non-cyber information attack threat diluted.
  • 4:45 — Report on effective use of human resources forwarded to Superiors.
  • Unfortunately, this is all true, except the part about the UCAG — we actually don’t know what they call themselves or what they call unauthorized chalkings.