 |
| Picture by Alex Dobson From the WKUHerald.com |
In
my opinion, Twitter is an open social networking site where people can voice
their thoughts and share them with a large audience.
Western Kentucky University has been “aggressively” trying
to shut down parody accounts on Twitter and is attempting to silence any
negatives comments about school officials and policies.
What is the limit for freedom of speech? If I’m not
harassing school officials, what legal rights does the school have when it
comes to sharing my opinion on an open networking site?
Instead of scolding students online, officials should take
the comments that are posted to heart, if it’s a valid complaint. Then take the
necessary steps to correct the subject of the complaint.
This isn’t some random fishing expedition by the school. If
WKU is actively searching for parody accounts on social media sites and
comments that show the school in anything else but a good light it’s because
more than a few students have issues with the university.
Stacy Biggs, WKU’S chief marketing officer, remarked that
the school isn’t trying to censor students, but that the school “has to offer
some amount of protection to its students.” Protect them from what though? The
comments made and parody accounts that are being sought after are targeted
toward the school’s policies and officials, not the students that attend.
Another reason stated by Biggs is that “such efforts are aimed at protecting
the school’s reputation and brand.” If this is the case there is no basis for
the search because scolding students who don’t agree with certain policies into
silence online to protect your brand is unethical.
Autum Calloway, a WKU junior and psychology major, said “ ‘I
don’t ever criticize the school on Twitter because I don’t want an ordeal made,’
...noting friends have been scolded by officials for postings deemed poor
representations of the school.”
“Western
Kentucky University's president has used Facebook to lecture students about
social networking etiquette, and officials persuaded Twitter to briefly shut
down a parody account dripping with sarcasm and criticism with posts marked
"(hash)wku," according to an article by the Associated Press.
This
is not okay. If this ever went to court and WKU won, which I find a very
doubtful outcome, then it could set a precedent for another organization to
pressure anyone who doesn’t agree with what the organization is doing with a
lawsuit if he/she doesn’t keep their comments to themselves. Then the First Amendment
goes out the window.
The
current policy in the student handbook at WKU dealing with online communication
states “accessible communications deemed inappropriate may lead to disciplinary
action.” However, “because WKU is a public university, it can’t make policies
on what is and is not appropriate speech,” said Adam Goldstein, attorney
advocate with the Student Press Law Center at WKU.
In an article posted on WKUHearld.com, Goldstein said, “As long as the word
‘inappropriate is there, that just means we’re going to punish whatever we
don’t like, as the government you positively cannot do that ever.”
WKU
officials needs to get out of their dream world and understand that there is no
utopia when it comes to being in the public eye. There is no feasible way to
make everyone happy. I think that if the school had left the accounts alone, as
long as no harassment was involved, the comments would have stopped,
eventually. WKU really drew more attention to itself because it addressed the
problem in a loud manner.
No comments:
Post a Comment