We have another controversy over the regulation of speech on college campuses this week. Thaddeus Pryor has been suspended and banned from Colorado College for two years after he sent an anonymous reply on social media that was meant as a joke. Regardless of the fact that the joke was insulting and decidedly unfunny, it was an anonymous comment made by a student on the social media site Yik Yak without the use of university equipment or involvement. As such, it raises serious free speech implications in my view.
In November 2015, Thaddeus Pryor sent an anonymous reply to the comment “#blackwomenmatter” on Yik Yak. Pryor’s response read, “They matter, they’re just not hot.” After posting the comment, Pryor was summoned to the office of Senior Associate Dean of Students Rochelle T. Mason. He did not lie and admitted to being the author of the posting.
The anonymous comment was deemed by the college as violating its rules on “Abusive Behavior” and “Disruption of College Activities” policies. The school invoked the right to punish any speech that ” produces ridicule, embarrassment, harassment, intimidation or other such result.” That is remarkably sweeping when it included embarrassment or “other such result.” Not only was he suspended and banned from campus but he was barred from taking classes at other institutions for academic credit. Pryor has appealed his suspension.
The College is not a state actor so it is not covered by the First Amendment. However, that does not lessen the free speech implications of a college regulating and punishing the speech of students or faculty on social media. There appears little consideration of the free speech implications in this decision or the definition of a line for students to determine when a comment, even an anonymous comment, could be deemed embarrassing or produce “other such result.” The result is a chilling effect on speech that is inimical to our academic mission in my view.
What do you think?
Paul, I donate to http://www.theFire.org annually. They provide a valuable service.
The key is in Turley’s last sentence: “The result is a chilling effect on speech that is inimical to our academic mission in my view.” True, the harsh punishment for mere speech does shamefully serve to chill speech. But what is the “academic mission” today or, for that matter, yesterday? It certainly seems that free speech and vigorous debate are NOT part of that mission, for if those concepts were, then universities would have Deans of Democracy. Instead, they all have Deans of Diversity and Inclusion. Thus, one might conclude that the “academic mission” is to promote the latter, even at the expense of free speech and vigorous debate. Now, M. Turley, why not urge your university to be unique, as opposed to monkey-see-monkey-do, and create a Dean of Democracy?
G. Tod Slone, Founding Editor (1998)
The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence
http://www.theamericandissident.org
wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com
todslone@hotmail.com
FIRE has gotten involved. Colorado College has their lowest ranking for freedom of speech.
neighbordave
You are right that it was a teaching moment, but they didn’t miss it.
We learned that CC is a liberal fascist institution and we were reminded that liberals will destroy lives in order to send a message.
Most of all, we learned that CC – a tiny, expensive, irrelevant school – needs to be shunned.
Yes, we learned.
Facebook was started by the socially inept Zuckerberg as a hot/not hot Harvard sorority girls ratings website.
If you have a teenager, you may be aware that there are “hot/not hot” websites where the kids rate celebrities and debate who is and who isn’t, and the determination can change day-by-day, hour-by-hour. I always thought it was a silly waste of time. I had no idea that the right to express one’s personal opinion on who is or isn’t “hot” may end up before the Supreme Court justices, who are not hot. Definitely not. But since Colorado College is only ranked 51st. among national colleges by Forbes, I think the student should move on.
I would like to see what the college actually said, verbally, or in writing, in their actions against the person. I would pursue a civil slander action. Here is JT’s description from above:
The anonymous comment was deemed by the college as violating its rules on “Abusive Behavior” and “Disruption of College Activities” policies. The school invoked the right to punish any speech that ” produces ridicule, embarrassment, harassment, intimidation or other such result.” That is remarkably sweeping when it included embarrassment or “other such result.” Not only was he suspended and banned from campus but he was barred from taking classes at other institutions for academic credit.
I would also like to know how this private college could bar the person from “taking classes at other institutions for academic credit.” Do they mean if he takes classes elsewhere he can not use those course credits for credit at this college? Probably. But if the state university follows any piece of this itShay then he can sue them for civil rights violation because they are a state actor.
I do not know if Colorado has any civil rights lawyers capable of handling this case. A case should be filed already seeking injunctive relief.
Jerry Garcia interview. “There’re all trying to kill me”, funny acid story. Watch out for frosting on the birthday cake. You’ve been warned!
I don’t see the offense. He agreed that “#blackwomenmatter”; he just doesn’t believe they are hot. So what? Maybe he’s gay. Maybe he only dates black women because he likes them not so hot. What a pathetic generation of pansies we have created. I don’t even recognize this country anymore.
If they are taking Federal money for grants, loans, etc. then they have to comply with some Federal standards. What is appears they have done is place a hold on his transcripts for the next two years so he cannot transfer to another school. Since he paid for those, they are his, although there may be a transcript fee.
I think a good lawyer can get those transcripts. Personally, I would not want to be back in this school.
What a silly move by the school
There was a teaching moment here, and they missed it
As a former civil rights lawyer in a prior life as a human before this life as a dog, I would explore the notion that this is “state action”. Are there state subsidies to this college, to the person who suspended the potential plaintiff?
I would look at slander, breach of contract and other civil remedies. I would look at Colorado’s state civil rights laws.
I would tell all people to steer clear of that strange place which calls itself a “college”. Rename it: Putin College. Or: Mao College.
And that changes everything.
Because freedom of speech is not the only First Amendment Concern here. Freedom of association is also implicated. Just as Graham’s Liberty Orwell Institute can expel a student for drunken dancing according to its Moral’s Integrity Code, Colorado College can suspend a racist little twit according to its rules and policies.
Hey, some people would rather go to a private college with higher standards. Others go for the drunken dancing.
WARNING. THIS COMMENT IS A MICROAGGRESSION :
AG Loretta Lynch is more concerned about hate speech toward Muslims than she is terrorism. We are in an Alice in Wonderland world. And while PC and 1st Amendment violations are perpetrated by both sexes, liberal women are the core of this malignant, pernicious virus.
After this incident it would be very ill advised to pursue an education at Colorado College. It is too risky.
The state board of high education needs to warn prospective students of the risks of enrolling at this college and encourage them to seek their education elsewhere.
The following was sent a private email to the true offender. But I have the right to also post it publicly. Considering the gravity of the offense counseling may have been indicated, dismissal and refusal I am guessing to transfer school records to another institution – for that is the only substantive power they have –
turns the college and the staff and by inference the President and Chancellors of same into the ivy league version of blithering idiots who have failed in their responsibilities much less the deeper responsibilities of citizenship.
So. Ms. Rebecca received this ….
“the party salutes and commends your for your action but cannot countenance your two years of failure.
The party wonders how a student under your care for two years remained undetected and thus not retrained in acceptable norms of social behavior nor the lack of your understanding the acceptable national conduct. This does not speak well of your program nor the caliber of instructors and trainers in Oblast Colorado.
Investigate, Hold public critique and self examination sessions. Determine which of your staff are to blame and fix punishment and re-education encampments.
The performance of your institution has allowed and encouraged unacceptable behavior in staff and students. A purge is indicated.
Refind and instill revolutionary fervor and zeal!
Seig Heil Comrade Educator Mason
We Serve The Party!
Get used to it. It’s what your kind want. A taste of your future. But as for te present
Seig me no heils I do not serve the party and it’s obvious you are no citizen of this country. You failed the progressive socialist movement and that is the only bright spot in this entire incident.
More importantly as a citizen of this country you appear to be a continuing failure in matters of correcting racist, sexist and no doubt tendencies toward bigotry.
With failures like you secular progressivism is likewise sure to fail and one hopes someone that can act as a proper role model be drawing your paycheck by next month.
Either way you are an embarrassment and reflect poorly on your self, your institution, and students you have served so badly.
How many others are you failing in terms of instilling common courtesy and politeness skills never mind more serious matters.
What is appears to be a confused attempt to usurp the functions of government were also noted and rebuked. Try doing that across international boundaries.Think! You have not the power to do that across State Boundaries.Much less speak for the world from your little acreage.
Go back to smoking whatever before Comrade Pelosi slaps your hand. It was not a ‘good try’ Seig Me No Heils your pathetic
Hitleresque imitation deserves contempt.
I sincerely hope you are offended. So what? I hope your Chancellors are more offended than I was. You have made them look like fools.
Seig Me No Heils I do not serve the party – happily neither do you. If you are te best socialist secular progressivism has ….that’s a good thing.
M. Aarethun”
The only way to stop racism, sexism and religious bigotry is not accept nor put up with it written or spoken in any way, shape, form or manner.
Since when did political correctness trump the first amendment? Where was the malicious intent, did the other party suffer any damages? Is this the start of a “war on objectionable speech”, then who gets to define what is offensive? Seems arbitrary and subjective to me. A little common sense here ppl.
Yes, the student saying remarks that could be deemed offensive to Blacks or Muslims must be punished in the harshest manner possible, under today’s leftist political agenda. Of course, attacks on Caucasians, Asians, Latinos, Christians, and Jews, and so forth that are not politically protected classes of people are fair game for all sorts of attacks. That’s the leftist way. I’m sure all leftists here agree, and that’s all that matters.
Yik yak will reveal a user if a university or college asks. This isn’t the first time they have done this.
how did the dean of students become aware of the comment? and how did they find out who wrote it?