McSwane answered about 10 minutes worth of questions from BSC members, who probed the process by which the editorial was decided upon, and how the lost advertising is affecting the staff. As the paper’s publisher, the BSC has the right to fire for McSwane for poor management, but not for exercising the First Amendment. The paper has lost so much money that it’s publishing Thursday’s paper in black and white, rather than with the color it normally uses.
“We did not do this setting out to make headlines. These past couple days have been hell for all of us. Our intention was to get college students, CSU students, thinking about issues that affect them,” McSwane said.
“Our points have been made, judging from the attendance here.” After the BSC questioned McSwane, it opened the floor for public comment. Nineteen people signed up to support McSwane and the editorial, with 12 opposed.
The 310-seat room was filled to capacity, with the crowd overflowing out the doors. Wednesday night’s comments swung between a debate over the First Amendment and whether the use of the word was appropriate, whether it brought CSU into disrepute, and even whether the paper will survive in its current incarnation. Student Cody Bartlett said he understood McSwane has the right to publish what he wants, but urged greater respect for the president.
He added: “Since when has this word been acceptable? This is not OK. Have you ever heard news reporters say the weather is going to F us over this weekend?
” Audience members laughed aloud at Bartlett’s joke, but vehemently shouted down another speaker who used the N-word in context of Barak Obama. That speaker, trying to make the point that some words are unacceptable, called for “common decency” in the widely distributed free newspaper. Other speakers said the F-word is a common utterance on a college campus, and said newspapers should be free to publish what they want.
And Pam Jackson, a technical journalism instructor, received a standing ovation when she criticized the CSU bookstore for pulling its advertisements from the Collegian. “This isn’t about profanity or unbiased journalism. It’s about a political agenda,” Jackson said.
Jackson said the BSC would send a dangerous message by punishing McSwane. “Such a decision would prove to those with a political agenda that the free press can be marginalized,” she said, calling petitions for his removal “a transparent, politically motivated action.” The CSU Campus Republicans gathered about 500 signatures from community members seeking to remove McSwane.
A competing petition drive in McSwane’s support gathered about 700. While fewer than expected community members spoke, emotions ran high within the auditorium at the Plant Sciences Building. Some students wore expletive-covered shirts, and others carried signs supporting the paper.
“A two-word editorial has not damaged my pride for being at CSU,” said junior Barry Arthur Litwin to loud cheers. The board has four options for proceeding: Dismiss the complaints; Admonish McSwane; Reprimand McSwane; or Dismiss McSwane. McSwane is not accused of any crime, and neither the BSC, made up of both students and faculty, nor CSU, have the power to censor McSwane.
The BSC is essentially deciding whether he imperiled the Collegian, which has seen an estimated $30,000 loss in advertising. The paper supports itself through advertising, and is independent from CSU, although the BSC can hire and fire its editor. No Collegian editor has ever been fired in its 116-year history.
The paper’s student advertising director said her staff is afraid to call advertisers, and that 18 clients cancelled their contracts within days of the editorial’s printing. “Dave’s job was not only to decide the editorial content of the paper, but also its financial wellbeing,” said Lenay Snyder. “He failed.
News RSS