Slashdot Mirror
Marquette Dental Student Suspended For Blogging
whiteSanjuro writes "Reported first by the bloggers, and now the mainstream press, is a story of a student being suspended by his university for the rest of the academic year because of entries in the student's blog which the university did not view favorably. It has already had some chilling effects and looks like it will be setting a standard that students at private universities aren't guaranteed free speech online. The student (who wishes to remain anonymous) is appealing the university's decision in an effort to remain in classes and finish out the current semester, but even the terms of re-admittance (pdf) leave the blogger subject to probation, minus a scholarship, and prohibit future free blogging. Perhaps now is the time to consider joining the EFF if you attend a private university and have a blog."
Freedom from tyranny means no party uses force to coerce another party to give up their property or person involuntarily. It also means that no force can be used to abridge any natural rights against a party's will on that party's property.
Force means making someone do something with no way out of the situation. Taxes are force. The draft is force. Government sponsored censorship is force.
What is not force? When two parties negotiate and one party will not accept part of the agreement, the parties may part ways. This is the free market. If you don't like my price, don't buy from me. If you don't like my skin color, don't sell to me. If you don't like the rules on my private property, leave. If my rules are excessive, competition will decide what the market will accept.
I believe a private school with NO direct government funding can set the rules for conduct and speech, even off their property. The student agrees to the rules to utilize the private property even if the student pays for it.
When my store sells a paintball marker ("gun") or a skateboard, I tell my customers I will refuse them future service if they don't use the items safely. I am allowed to pick who I voluntarily trade with and how. The student can negotiate or not agree to a rule, the school can refuse.
Only government has a monopoly on force. They can not, in a free market, truly own or control property -- they only use what all the people loan then. As such, they'd be abusing their monopoly on force by setting rules for speech or expression, as they control no property. The government borrowed property is not theirs to rule, it is the people's and all people are free to speak or express themselves (or bear arms on their property which includes publicly managed properties).
If the school accepts government funding directly, they can not regulate expression. If they are truly privately funded, they can (in a free market) say what conduct they expect in a person's life. There are other competitive schools that may not have such restrictive policies that the student can attend.
> Perhaps now is the time to consider joining the EFF if you attend a private university and have a blog.
Are you kidding me? Now is the time to consider joining the EFF period!
This affects us all, and it's high time we started to behave accordingly.
A university not caring about their students and it's not mine!!!!
In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
Just because you have the constitutional right to free speech doesn't mean you can say what you like with no repurcussions. If you tell your boss to go fuck himself, the 1st amendment doesn't protect you from being fired. School is no different.
Welcome to the real world, college boy. You don't like something, you're free to bitch about it all you want. However, if others are less than pleased with your comments, they may express their displeasure in ways that adversely affect you.
As the Parent poster points out, I'm free to create a blog and call my boss a stupid fuckhead. on the other hand, he's also free to fire my ass as soon as he finds out.
Oh, and guess what? All that stuff you've been publishing on the internet under your real name? Every future, potential employer is going to see it as they all google recruits now. How many companies do you think actually want a known rabble-rouser in the midst?
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
As much as I find what Marquette is doing disgusting, it is NOT illegal. The first amendment doesn't give you the right to say whatever you what wherever or whenever. The government may not do this but there is nothing in the first amendment or anywhere else in the constitution which prevents a private entity (like this college) from doing so.
Anyone who has read the "terms of re-admittance" letter can clearly see that they are not terms of readmittance but a very clear "get out now, thank you."
Based on the other blogger reports (I did not read the mainstream press report), this is quite clearly overreaction on the part of a flustered administrator. Unfortunately, I think the poor student is out of luck. As has been stated; if you attend a private university then you submit completely to their rules as they set them. If they chafe too badly, it may be best to leave (as they have not so subtly asked him to do).
A private university can expell a student for many more reasons than a public one can. It's not a state school. If he doesn't want to be burdened by the private school's restrictions, he shouldn't go there...This is more along the lines as the private Catholic high school that kicked out a student because her legal guardians were lesbians. In this case, I think it's a jackass thing for them to do, but I don't believe it's illegal.
I am not beyond bothered by this type of thing because it's that type of experience that one will find in the real world in any private institution, with your employer. The school is expensive and he is effectively paying a $14,000 fine (tuition) to repeat his semester which is completely ridiculous but perhaps he learned his lesson and that even free speech has its cost and consequences in that people will want to get back at you for this type of thing and perhaps saves him and a lot of other people (classmates) pain down the road if they learn the lesson about human nature. But it also makes the university professor and others look completely insecure with themselves.
The charges of "harassment, hazing or stalking" are dubious though and really bring up if they are punishing free speech. They should have just blown it off and perhaps the insulted Professor should have read his comments aloud in the class just to embarass the hell out of the offending student and make him sweat:D That would have been more appropriate.
What bothers me much more is when Private Universities try to keep women hush-hush about rape cases (against their top jocks) and bring that through their private courts instead of releasing it publicly. Violent cases like that should be illegalized because the outcome isn't justice, but a way for them to keep their best players on the field. Somewhat tangent to this case, but it needs to be said.
Er, no. The First Amendment promises that you will not be subject to criminal prosecution for your speech. If I call my boss a *bleep*, or start singing showtunes in the middle of Psychology 101, I am not Constitutionally protected against consequences. I just won't be arrested for it.
By your argument: "The US Constitution guarentees that you will not suffer the consequences of censorship nor retaliation for what you say", then Slashdot lowering my karma, or restricting me from posting due to troll/flamebait posts is a violation of my civil rights. This is not the case.
Unfortunately, people claim Free Speech protection so often and from private entities, that when true violations of it occur, such as cartoonists getting visits from the Secret Service for insulting the President (not just the current one), are arrested at peaceful protests, etc. the true violations get lost in the noise.
Free speech is with regards to the government, not to private parties. Write an email to everyone in your company saying what a jerk your boss is and you will be fired. The Constitution does not protect such things. However, you will not be arrested for writing such an email. Similarly you will not be arrested or have your property taxes doubled, etc. for blogging about how you disagree with the war in Iraq. That is free speech. That is protected by The Constitution.
This is not a free speech issue, it is a contract issue. He had a contract with the university. They are claiming that he violated that contract by violating their code of conduct, and thus are taking actions that their contract says they can do in such cases. He can only argue that he did not break their contract or that their contract language was too vague and thus non-binding.
Now Marquette may reverse their ruling because of the bad press. They will probably be worried that less people will be willing to enter into contract with them given their actions in this case. That would mean their school would be less desirable to students and thus their business would suffer. Or they may decide that such negative effects are not significant enough.
"half a dozen postings including one describing a professor as 'a (expletive) of a teacher' and another that described 20 classmates as having the 'intellectual/maturity of a 3-year-old.' "
This is a private institution enacting disciplinary action on a member who directly insulted other members and staff of said instutition ina public forum.
If I walked down the street telling everyone how much my professor sucked monkey balls, and one of the people I told happened to be the dean, I would be amazed if I didn't get suspended or expelled.
The kid wasn't put in jail. His rights haven't been infringed in any way.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Enough with the free speech vs. private university arguments. Free speech applies to government prosecution, not enforcement of the rules of a private organization. As others have noted, if you are a member of a private organization, be it a university, company, or professional sports team, you are subject to their rules if you wish to remain a member.
The problem with this story isn't that the student violated the rules and now doesn't want to deal with the consequences, but that the administration is being accused of interpretting the rules far beyond their intended meaning, employing selective enforcement, and not allowing the student to present his side of the case. As a graduate of a private university, there are usually rules in place to ensure due process for the student as well. I haven't read Marquette's rulebook, nor do I plan to, but the discussion should really be focused around that, not free speech vs. university rules.
By persecuting the blogger, while linking to a website containing many other negative comments, they are guilty of discrimination.
Discrimination of what? Race? nope. Gender? nope. Sexual Orientation? nope. Religion? nope. How are they discriminating against the student?
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Nothing at all here about conducting interactions with honesty. And that's the problem. It's all about feelings now.
They really are a bunch of 3-year-olds.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
He doesn't have to break a law. He has breached his contract with the school. The constitution doesn't ensure free speech, it ensures that the government will not make laws preventing free speech. So a public/Tax funded college would not be able to do this. But at a private school, you signed the contract.
It's just like any other behavioral contract. Soda/Beer deliverers can not drink competitors' beverages. Knowledge workers sign NDA. CEOs sign ethical agreements. Break the contract and you're out a job.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
I disagree completely.
Prices of any goods or service is directly affected by the supply of money for the goods versus the supply of goods.
Government "easy money" grants and loans increase the supply of money -- forcing prices way up. Easy loans/grants is to blame for high tuition costs.
"Marquette Dental Student Suspended For Blogging"
/. to have Enquirer-like sensationalist headlines to drive page views and comments, but this is obviously wrong. He was not suspended for blogging. He was suspended for directly insulting professors and students in a public forum.
Typical for
This stinks. I never thought I'd see the day in America when a STUDENT couldn't write or say what they wanted.
Man, you haven't been paying attention for a few years, have you? That day has come and gone, a LONG time ago.
These days, if a first grader makes a gun out of his thumb and index finger and "shoots" another kid during a schoolyard game of cops and robbers, he's likely to be labelled a potential Harris or Klebold. If a teenager has a violent dream and writes about it in a school assignment, the school goes into lockdown and the police get called.
If you think what happened to this Marquette student is absurd, wait until you read some of the stuff at that link. And those are mostly in public schools. Bastions of free speech and thought, my ass.
~Philly
Those cases have nothing to do with this one, do they? Did you even read the article, or do you just like bashing the Catholic Church? (I am not now, have never been, never expect to be, a member of the Catholic Church.)
/.
The question is whether his behavior was merely rude, or harassing and unprofessional, and if so, was it enough to result in the punishment he got?
Nobody here is trying to silence anyone-- either the student or people making utterly absurd comparisons on
If you can't tell the difference, perhaps you ought to get counseling.
If you are teaching in the name of the Catholic Church, then guess what? If you teach heresy, then the Church may very well get upset. And in terms of Oscar Romero, I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about. Priests are supposed to save souls, not get involved in politics. Pope John Paul II, being a bishop of Poland during times of extreme oppression and occupation by foreign powers, knew a little bit about the subject.
Evolution is a fact. Darwinism is a joke.
Marquette is a so-called "Jesuit" university. The Jesuits are noted for good thinking and solid logic (among other things), and the Jesuit universities are supposed to produce graduates with high-quality thinking skills and strong values. (Hey, I went to a Jesuit University in Chicago for a while!) In the early 70's, academic quality took a back seat to economic factors, academic standards were reduced to meet the requirement for government subsidies and to match more clearly with the reduced expectations of the public school HS graduates of lower ability. The egalitarian attitude did not extend to the student/teacher relationship. University staff and instructors still think of the student as an annoyance necessary to get their paycheck. Colleges have a number of seats, and after the first seats are filled with the students who can pay full boat or bring in outside dollars, empty seats are sold at a discount to fill capacity and get the marginal dollars. (They call this discount a "scholarship". Sometimes they recover the full sales price of the seat by convincing someone else to pay the difference.) The public perception of the University has a direct impact on the financial success of the institution.
Interestingly enough, the "good thinkers" in this University have damaged the public perception 'way beyond what the blogger did. Now all they can save is their egos. The Dean, despite his incompetence as a thinker, decision maker and risk manager, is probably immune to termination or other consequences during the period of his contract. Under certain circumstances he may have tenure and actually be almost completely immune to termination.
Too bad.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
And, of course, technically, you are correct. However, in a society where most everything is private, how much free speech do you have left if this kind of behavior is tolerated? Remember, stores are private property, as are malls, a good number of sidewalks, parks and similarly accessible places. And the Internet? Hah - you better make sure that what you post is located on your servers, served up over your pipes and administrated by no one else. After all, everything is owned by private companies, whose only interest in preserving their common carrier status is so they can avoid expensive lawsuits.
To illustrate how abuse of this can lead to a dead society, look no further than messageboards. I used to be part of a vibrant videogame messageboard, with plenty of educated and interesting posters. One day though, the owner/admin of the board decided to exert his right to extensively moderate posts he didn't agree with. The end result was that the board is now nearly dead, with only a few posts a week, made by some die-hard old fogeys. The same can happen to society at large - except that you can't migrate as easily.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
The first amendment doesn't give you the right to say whatever you what wherever or whenever.
Actually, the 1st Amendment does give you the right to say whatever you want. It just doesn't protect you from private entities to use that against you.
Actually the 1st Amendment does not give you any rights, it protects your rights you already have.
Sie ist tunbar!
Ummmm... what country do you live in? If it's the United States of America, you're in for a rude awakening.
State laws vary, of course, so your jurisdiction may indeed follow your explanation. But generally, unless you have an employment contract, you're an "at-will" employee and your boss can fire you for any reason or no reason at all (except if he fired you on the basis of your race, religion, gender, etc.).
I think the difference here is that universities, whether or not receiving federal funding, have traditionally protected freedom of speech on their campuses - particularly speech that is critical of the university, government and other authoritative institutions. This is why professors are granted tenure - so that they may not be fired for thinking outside the box. It is only (relatively) recently that academics have begun screening said speech for "hateful" content.
If the student had said something actionable at law, either criminally or civilly, I could respect the Dean's position - as it is, the student didn't even violate the school's own code of conduct!
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
I think there's a different standard here. Most universities purport to tolerate free speech and the free exchange of ideas. Heck, Marquette even sponsors a forum through which students can criticize their professors, which features anonymous students saying nasty things about named professors.
Against this backdrop, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect that the student could post such things in his blog, which was likely read by only a few friends.
Furthermore, the university also purports to recognize some sort of right to due process, as shown by its hearing procedure. As we have seen, it was really a kangaroo court, where the accused didn't even get to present his own evidence! Add to this the fact that the university's own expert on ethics said that the kid didn't do anything unethical or in violation of the code of conduct, and you've got a real miscarriage of justice here.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Quite a stretch, but Im going to have to assume that you really are that idiotic. I can call you a jackass all I want, but you are not allowed to hit me for it. If you do, you will be sued and jailed (criminal assault, and then a civil suit). And you would deserve every bit of the ass pumping you would recieve in jail, for being both a moron and a jackass.
Hey! You go to a Jesuit school, don't be suprised to find the Inquisition!
It's ridiculous for a professional/graduate school to regulate drinking at all. IMHO, it's pretty dumb the way U.S. colleges/universities do it. People who are over 18 do not need people acting as their parents. If people drink when they are under 21, they should face the police, not some silly disciplinary process. If they don't bother anyone enough for the police to take notice, why trouble over it?
Universities shouldn't be any more liable for the illegal/stupid things that their non-minor students do than a regular landlord, and if the students live off university property, it shouldn't be their problem at all.
Of course, universities have handbooks/rule books that their students are required to abide by in order to receive their services. Punishing students within those guidelines is within their rights, as a private institution can deny its services arbitrarily, assuming they follow antidiscrimination laws. They are also generally required to abide by the rules they set out. I haven't researched the details of this case and I'm not necessarily arguing in favor of the student, rather, I'm advocating how university rules should be designed.
-Splat
Apparently his blog described several bouts of what could be considered "binge drinking."
Sure, I guess it could if you don't bother with the medical definition of binge drinking or the clinical assement done by a professional on this student. Here it is just in case:
A clinical assessment of the student done by a psychotherapist at American Behavioral Clinics said of the student that "it became clear that he does not presently have any issues that would concern me clinically." And further, the student's "behavior regarding the use of alcohol is recreational or episodic in nature and in no way would I characterize it as overuse or abuse."
IMHO you shouldn't disparage someone in a public forum
Fair enough. Who exactly did he disparage BTW? Oh right, some unnamed people. I wonder how those people with no names sleep at night?
My own personal experience is that people that get called before the Dean of students probably deserve to get kicked out
OK, I guess that settles it. He deserved it!
Throw in the fact that instead of apologizing, accepting probation, and keeping his nose clean this kid *demands* a conduct hearing.
I guess he thought he had a right to give his side of the story and have a fair hearing. Seriously, where did he think he was going to school? America or something? Next thing you know criminals will *demand* a trial before being sent to prison. I mean seriously, in my personal experience if you get arrested for something you probably deserve to go to jail.
Then this kid gets his conduct hearing
At which he was barely allowed to address those thier and his witnesses were told not to show up because they wouldn't be allowed to speak (even though those witnesses were faculty themselves). Not much of a hearing an any sense of the word I can think of. Again, where does he think he is? America? At least Marquette doesn't have a law program....oh wait they do! VERY SCARY!!!!
I mean, seriously, how mad do you have to be at someone before you go to the Dean and point out crap they say in their blog?
Oh sorry, didn't realize he made someone mad. Your right, kick him out!
"reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
Why does it need to be the EFF? I don't know how it is in the USA, but in some other countries, such as the UK, there is a student union. Other than provide certain student related services it also serves the roll of protecting the student interests. Surely this could be a case that could be brought up with a student union?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.