Complaints to the USMC
There have been at least six complaints regarding content discussed by the University Student Media Committee since the creation of the committee in 1982. All but one of the complaints was submitted regarding The Daily Barometer, though the USMC is the governing body for all five branches of media in the OSU Department of Student Media.
Before 1982, print media at OSU was established under the Board of Student Publications, and broadcast media was under the purview of the OSU broadcast program. As Director of Student Media Frank Ragulsky and Assistant Director Ann Robinson were hired, the OSU Department of Student Media was established - and with it, the USMC. Only three of these matters were submitted as formal complaints to the USMC. Many of the following issues were merely brought to the attention of the committee by members because of the interest stirred on campus.
PUBLIC PRIVACY?
According to Ragulsky, during the 1996-1997 school year, a KBVR-TV crew was capturing shots of Central Park in downtown Corvallis. During that shoot, the crew filmed a transient man. After seeing himself on KBVR-TV, the man took offense to being filmed. He filed a formal complaint to the USMC to argue that he has a right to not be filmed in public. The committee met to discuss the matter and agreed that because he was in a public space, the man had no rights to privacy.
TOBACCO ADVERTISEMENT
On Feb. 19, 1999, the USMC allowed OSU student Seth Wolpin to file a formal complaint. Wolpin addressed the subject of tobacco advertising in The Daily Barometer. "Wolpin identified himself as a registered nurse and a master's candidate in public health, according to the minutes of the USMC meeting. "He said the field of public health is dedicated to the prevention of preventable diseases and that his desire to follow that mission brought him to complain."
The Daily Barometer received $789 for that advertising insert, according to the minutes. Wolpin believed that receiving money for a tobacco ad turned an issue about health into one about money. Wolpin cited the Barometer mission statement of "striving to publish material that helps the University as a whole." Wolpin, during his hearing with the USMC, mentioned editorials run by the Barometer against the proposed Corvallis Smoking Ban. Wolpin stressed that the bottom line of his complaint was removal of the tobacco ads in the Barometer. Wolpin noted that the OSU Bookstore is "prohibited from selling tobacco products and believes that the student newspaper should be also." One USMC voting member, who later became a staff photographer at the Corvallis Gazette-Times, mentioned that alcohol was advertised (at that time) at Parker Stadium, now Reser Stadium.
The committee decided, after discussion, that decisions regarding advertisements should be left to the discretion of the editor. This was decided unanimously.
EDITORIAL CONTENT
On Jan. 31, 2000, the OSU President's Commission on the Status of Women at OSU submitted a complaint regarding content, in general, of The Daily Barometer. However, there was one particular column that caught their interest. "The PCOSW recognizes the importance of a student newspaper in contributing to the campus community. Because we value this medium and recognized its power, we wish to go on record in support of the Student Media Committee requiring diversity training for the Barometer staff," wrote the commission.
A sports column, "Big win indicative of things to come," by Andrew Hinkelman used the phrase "Pac-10's bitch" to describe the UCLA Bruin's new status in the league. This column printed on Oct. 25, 1999. On Oct. 26, 1999, Hinkelman offered an apology in print. According to Ragulsky, the USMC took no action toward Hinkelman.15 See Appendix, part I, for text of Hinkelman's article.
DIFFERENCE, POWER AND DISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENT
On Oct 5, 2000, Associate Professor of philosophy Lani Roberts sent an e-mail requesting to meet with USMC Chair Robert Hood. Roberts was requested to meet with the USMC and did so on Oct. 30. Roberts specifically mentioned an ad in The Daily Barometer. The advertiser was Mothers Against Drunk Driving. The ad showed a picture of a young Black man, holding his head in his hands, with the caption, "liquor then beer, never fear. 90% of all campus rapes involve alcohol."
Roberts also mentioned an inserted ad from Yahoo! Messenger. The text of the ad read, "Stoney - get over here quick. She's about to take her top off. - Bob" and "Yahoo! Messenger ~ The only people who see it are the people you're talking to. messenger.yahoo.com" . Roberts wrote in an e-mail to Hood, "We are not yet three weeks into this academic year and the Barometer has accepted and published advertisements which are degrading to women and, most recently, the MADD ad (Sept. 29) which perpetuates a very dangerous and false racial stereotype regarding black men and rape."
She continued: "This is entirely unacceptable anywhere, but particularly in an institution of higher education which seeks to create an inclusive and respectful community as a mater of its stated commitments."
In her e-mail to Hood, Roberts discussed a previously mentioned suggestion that Barometer employees be required to take a Difference, Power and Discrimination course within the first year of working at the newspaper. As of 2009, a DPD course is a baccalaureate core requirement for all graduates.
During the Oct. 30 USMC meeting, Roberts brought the complaint to the committee and mentioned an earlier meeting with Ragulsky and Robinson. At that meeting, the three parties agreed that Barometer staff were in need of a higher level of difference, power and discrimination training.
Robinson and Ragulsky agreed to teach ALS 199: Ethics, Culture and Influence: The role of media in America. This class, taught winter 2001, included guest speakers, such as the director of Multicultural Affairs, as well as lessons on libel and slander. After discussion, the committee unanimously decided to require all students who are employed in Student Media to complete the student media ethics and diversity course or a university DPD course within their first year in Student Media.
Ragulsky submitted a decision package during the 2000-2001 budget cycle of $6,000 to fund the student media ethics and diversity courses. The Educational Activities Committee rejected this decision package. Robinson and Ragulsky received no reimbursement for teaching the ALS 199 class for one term. The class was discontinued because students from the Department of Student Media were not interested in taking the class, according to Ragulsky.
WHITE COLUMNIST ON BLACK CULTURE
The USMC met on April 15, 2004 to discuss the "controversy surrounding a column printed in The Daily Barometer a week earlier." David Williams, a Barometer staff columnist, wrote a column, printed on April 9, 2004 titled "A message from a white male to the African American community." Williams highlighted African American poverty levels, prison statistics, AIDS numbers and singer Robert Kelly as a "Black role model."
Williams wrote, "It's not the fact that black people are doing bad things that hurt then collectively as a group. White people do terrible things. Hispanics do terrible things. Koreans do terrible things. People do terrible things." He continued: "My point, however, is this: There is a lack of morality in the black community because African American leaders, whether Jesse Jackson or the NAACP, choose to rally themselves around minorities who seem to have little quality characteristics about them."
On April 9 - the day the column printed -Roberts e-mailed Ragulsky saying, "The blatantly racist column today is disgusting, blaming African American people for their own oppression." Williams was fired by Barometer editor Nikki Sullivan.25 On April 12 - one day before an apology ran in the Barometer - students stood "shoulder-to-shoulder" and passed a megaphone around on the steps of the Memorial Union to protest Williams' column.
OSU student Shannon Warren was quoted in a Barometer article titled, "Barometer column focus of campus protest," "[Williams' column] was not written in a way that portrays both sides of an issue. He wrote plenty about problems within the black community but nothing about any of the strides we have made as black people."28 In the same article, student Charlene McGee was quoted as saying, "This is not the first time. Or the second or the third time [the Barometer] has offended people from certain groups. The Barometer needs to be held more accountable."28
On April 13, The Daily Barometer editorial board offered an apology for printing Williams' column. "While the opinions expressed in columns are not representative of the staff members of the Barometer, we have a policy never to print material that is discriminatory, racist or sexist. By printing such material in the Barometer, we legitimize the messages, even if we don't agree. We never meant to offer racially insensitive opinions as valid ones by printing the column."
On April 14, a forum was held at which Sullivan, Ragulsky and Barometer forum editor Christina Stewart were able to answer questions from the audience. Stewart apologized for "letting this column get through," according to reports from the Barometer; "Forum attempts to conquer issues" was printed on April 15. "Sullivan said Williams 'took a very serious topic and mishandled it.' She added that Williams has been unresponsive to making the column into a learning experience, which she felt was necessary for every staff member." President Ray was in attendance, "calling the column incident a 'teachable moment'" Barometer staff writer Dan Traylor wrote on April 19 "The Daily Barometer has learned that former columnist David Williams may have used some of the wording of a nationally syndicated columnist in his April 9 column without proper attribution to the author."
Traylor's story continued: An analysis by The Daily Barometer shows that five of Williams' paragraphs closely resemble, in wording and order, six paragraphs from an April 2 column by Leonard Pitts, who writes for the Miami Herald and has won a Pulitzer Prize for his work. While some of the content of Williams' column is similar to Pitts' column, there are differences. Williams returned a phone call from The Daily Barometer but did not answer specific questions on the record about the column Sunday night.
"In a Sunday column in the Oregonian, Associate Editor David Reinhard wrote that, '(Williams) says he read the Pitts' column ... and was inspired to write his own piece.'" Reinhard wrote the first column, which ran on April 18. Rienhard wrote: Is there a racial double standard here? Is a white kid being persecuted for writing something a black man writes with impunity? Talk radio's Lars Larson has spotlighted this basic unfairness here, and he's right to raise the issue. I'm torn, however, because I'm not so sure Pitts and Williams were making the exact same point in substance or tone. But did Williams deserve to get the boot? Never.
Rienhard discussed Williams' column in an honest way, saying that he was deriving content from Pitts; however, the act was not plagarism. Rienhard also called Williams' column "unrefined." "What's most shameful is the way Williams' editor sacked him at the first whiff of controversy and offered up one of the more craven apologies you'll see this side of the Moscow trial," Rienhard continued. "This from folks who approved his piece before publication. Maybe they should fire themselves. Or maybe not. This should be a learning experience for all involved, since they're at a university of all places." The second column printed in The Oregonian on April 25, 2004, by Pitts of The Miami Herald, was titled "Teachable moment goes by wayside in controversy over college paper piece." Pitts wrote, "People keep asking me what I think of David William's [sic] column. That's because his column, published recently in the student newspaper of Oregon State University, was inspired by one of mine."
Many of the themes of Williams' column were inspired from one of Pitts'. Pitts' column - titled "Being black isn't reason enough to merit support" - discussed singer Robert Kelly as well as the concept of rallying around Black community members who are in trouble.
During the April 15 USMC meeting, Ragulsky mentioned that President Ray had "told the Barometer staff that this is a campus problem and the Barometer simply put itself in the line of fire. He concluded that the column by David Williams has provided an educational experience for us all. What we need to do is focus on the best way to prevent it from happening again."12 A USMC member asked editorial page editor Christina Stewart to explain the process of allowing the column to be printed. Stewart described accepting the column on a Wednesday and reading it the evening before it printed.
According to the minutes, "At that time, she thought it would raise some controversy but did not see it as causing the kind of offense and pain that it apparently caused. When the complaints started to come in on Friday morning, it was clear that the column had crossed the line in the area of cultural sensitivity." Also according to the minutes, Williams was unwilling to attend a forum at which community members could talk with him about grievances. Because of his unwillingness to learn and the submission of a letter of complaint, Williams was fired.
Many on the USMC believed that the headline was the most inflammatory part of the column. Stewart told the committee that either she or someone on the copy desk wrote the headline for the column, not Williams. The committee made suggestions for future improvement, including requiring columnists to work as news reporters for at least one term before becoming columnists. No decisions were made.
The USMC unanimously passed a motion to draft a letter to the administration calling for specific classes to support media education. Because of the forum regarding Williams' column, KBVR-FM was able to gather a group of people who would have liked to produce minority programming. See Appendix, part VI, for Williams' original column and Appendix, part VII, for the apology written by Barometer staff members.
WHITE COLUMNIST ON BLACK CULTURE, PART II
Because of the fallout with Williams, Barometer columnist Sanjai Tripathi submitted a rebuttal column to his editors. In an e-mail to Ragulsky, Tripathi said, "I am writing this message to inform all relevant parties that I intend to file my own complaint against the Barometer to the student media committee. I feel that my own free speech rights have been violated, and I hope and expect that you, Mr. Ragulsky, will assist me in this process."
Tripathi believed that the Barometer staff had not performed their duties in helping Williams form a good argument, respond to controversy and craft a good headline. Tripathi also believed that the Barometer staff seemed to default blame for the column to Williams himself. In his e-mail, Tripathi argued that because The Daily Barometer is nestled in an educational setting, the editor should not have unlimited power.
Also, Tripathi had twice submitted a column that addressed Williams' column, however, his editors had censored the column. Tripathi wrote, "I can only conjecture as to the actual cause of my column's censure. I believe, either deliberately or unconsciously, that the false and imagined problems cited [including factual inaccuracies] are in fact rationalizations for the editor's desire to simply avoid more complaints."
In his submitted column, Tripathi wrote, "The Barometer staff implies [there is more to the issue of Williams' column than poor word choice] in their editorial apology when they refer to Williams' column and state, 'we have a policy never to print material that is discriminatory, racist or sexist.' However, as quoted in my first paragraph, they do explicitly charge [Williams] with the crime of racial insensitivity."
According to the minutes from the meeting on April 27, 2004, Tripathi met with the USMC. The committee entertained his complaint. Tripathi said that his complaint "centered on the editor's decision not to run a column that he wrote in support of David Williams' right to work at the Barometer." Tripathi told the committee that his first amendment rights had been violated. A member of the committee, Tasha Rassuli, noted that Barometer editors can and regularly do reject columns for publication. Rassuli also said that she feared making a decision in this matter, because then the committee "could be setting a precedent regarding daily editorial decisions." It was noted by the committee that a right to free speech does not necessitate a right to publication.
Also according to the minutes, "Tripathi wants the newspaper to continue to be a bastion of free speech. He believes that the committee needs to help the paper reduce the ambiguity over what is acceptable to print and asked that the committee draw up more specific guidelines for the editor. Tripathi feels too much power rests with the editor and that some one should be guarding against abuse of that power."
Because of the ability of the USMC to remove an editor the committee feels is abusing his or her power, the committee agreed that further micromanagement was unnecessary. "The committee unanimously agreed that there were no substantive claims to his arguments and voted to continue full support of the editor," according to the minutes. Tripathi's column was not printed.
BAROMETER COLUMNIST DIGS ON ISLAM
In terms of formal complaints, this particular columnist was never taken all the way to the USMC. However, a column by columnist Nathanael Blake stirred controversy when it was printed on Feb. 8, 2006. Blake picked up on a news story that was circulating the globe. According to the Corvallis Gazette-Times, Danish newspapers published cartoons that depicted the prophet Muhammad. The cartoons caused riots, which resulted in the deaths of at least 12 people. Blake took the opportunity to comment on the behaviors of Muslims around the globe, not only in this situation but regarding collective societies. Blake wrote, "Blatantly put, we expect Muslims to behave barbarously: Muslims die in protests over supposed insults, ho-hum."
To those of Muslim faith, the depiction of the Prophet violates a basic tenant of their religion. OSU Muslim Student Association Vice President Nada Mohamed told the Gazette-Times that Muslims tend to not draw representations of animals and humans. "We're not supposed to draw anything with a soul," Mohamed told the Gazette-Times. To the Islamic world, the cartoons were not "supposed insults," as Blake explained them to be.
Letters to the editor poured in regarding Blake's column, "The Islamic double-standard." While some letters supported Blake's position, others broke down his argument - which was based in out-of-context passages of the Quran. Muslim students submitted letters that printed in The Daily Barometer in the following days.
Ferhat Muhtar, a graduate teaching assistant in industrial and manufacturing engineering, pointed out - via letter to the editor - the most offensive aspects of Blake's column. Blake wrote: I would suggest to the Saudi government that if they want me to show their pedophile prophet (yes, Mohammad first had sex with his favorite wife when she was nine and he was in his fifties) any respect, they ought to make it legal to publicly practice my religion in their kingdom... Christianity grew on the blood of its martyrs; Islam grew on the blood of its enemies. The only combatant a modern Muslim martyr is sure of killing is himself; he prefers that the others be women and children. There are, to be sure, individual Muslims who are quite nice, and even a few Muslim countries that aren't run by tyrannical kleptocrats or theocrats. But on average, Islamic nations are oppressive and poor.
Muhtar wrote that she believes Blake is "a young person full of prejudice, I feel this at his every sentence that exactly taste like cliched slogans memorized from some extreme resources." An op-ed by Aly Mohamed, president of the OSU Muslim Student Association, was published on Feb. 14, 2006. Mohamed used his space as an opportunity to explain the misconceptions of Islamic and Muslim society that are portrayed by the media. First, Mohamed explained that there is a difference between the ideal Islamic society and the reality of Muslim societies.
Mohamed wrote, "After the attacks of Sept. 11, negative views regarding Islam have materialized rapidly and have become more concerted in their propagation. There is not room for empathy, and I know it's a Western dilemma because I have often witnessed Arab Christians stand in elegant defense of Islam. They understand the difference between the Islamic religion and a Muslim; the former can never be represented by the latter in the same way that abortion clinic bombers do not represent Christianity."
Mohamed also addressed Blake's assumption that Islam perpetuates the oppression of women by quoting passages of the Quran other than those used by Blake. It was also noted that the MSA did not choose to protest after a comic ran that was questionable to those students as well as other OSU community members. The cartoon was printed in December and showed "Jesus as a mutant with wings and declaring, 'Behold!' the comic also showed Muhammad as a blade-wielding robot under the heading, 'Beware!'"
A protest was held on March 2, 2006 by the OSU Muslim Student Association. The protest was intended to protest the Danish cartoons and the column from Blake.39 On March 3, 2006, a University of North Carolina graduate drove his SUV into a common area on campus, injuring six students. It was reported that the attack was meant to serve as "retribution for the treatment of Muslims around the world."39
After the protest, Barometer Editor-in-Chief DD Bixby wrote "Out of adversity and into lemonade." This commentary explained that after speaking to family members about the situation at OSU, she was able to start understanding that there were stories to tell on campus. "If it was 'their job to explain,' it was my job to listen," Bixby wrote. "Not just print letters and meet every conversation with the coolness First Amendment rights afford the press, but really listen and hear the people, not just the words. On Feb. 23, two weeks and a day after 'The Islamic double-standard,' by Nathanael Blake was published, I finally heard what the big deal was."
Bixby described the ongoing, world-wide struggle that many Muslims are facing. While she questioned whether the Barometer was really the cause of the first "wound," she admitted that the Barometer had "certainly [thrown] salt to make it sting."
Bixby wrote, "Diversity at the Barometer has long been criticized, and our answer has been, and largely still is, 'Our door is always open and there are always more stories to write.' What I'm learning is that that door only looks open to some, no matter what we say or how many 'We're hiring' advertisements are published."
Because no formal complaint was filed to the USMC, no action was taken against Blake or any member of the Barometer staff. Bixby concluded her year-long term as editor in March. In April 2007, Blake earned a "silver metal" as one of MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person in the World" for a blog he wrote about the Virginia Tech shooting that occurred on April 16.
Blake, who was writing for an online media outlet called "Human Events," wrote an opinion piece asking "Where Were the Men?" Blake challenged the men who were victims of the Virginia Tech massacre, asking why they didn't risk their lives to stop the shooter.
DPD ACCELERATION: QUICKER FIXESOn May 19, 2006, the USMC heard a proposal from Lani Roberts and Jun Xing, the director of the DPD program. According to the USMC minutes of that meeting, the proposal, brought by Roberts and professor of women studies Janet Lee, was to accelerate the already-existing DPD requirement. The proposal was to require students to complete a DPD course by the end of the second term of their employment at Student Media. The original requirement - that students complete a DPD course or the ALS ethics course taught by Robinson and Ragulsky within the first year of their employment - was established after the Barometer printed a column by Andrew Hinkleman. This column was found to be sexist and offensive, according to Ragulsky.
Because of an incident regarding representation of Muslim students in the Barometer that occurred during winter 2006, Lee and Roberts requested a meeting with Student Media staff and then an audience with the USMC. According to Student Media Office Manager Lois Lessert, more than 90 percent of students had completed the DPD requirement. According to Ragulsky, those who had not were either transfer students for whom the course requirement was not being enforced or freshman.
According to the minutes of the meeting, "Roberts noted that her role is as a spokesperson for those who are alienated by things published in the Barometer. Students go to Lani and ask for her help and support. The staff of the paper needs to gain a perspective that helps them understand their privilege. Roberts believes that taking a DPD class can greatly enhance that understanding."
During the meeting, Ragulsky raised the subject of the David Williams column that printed on April 9, 2004. The column, which proved controversial and insensitive, was written by a student who had taken three DPD courses. According to the minutes, "Ragulsky wondered if the DPD courses fill the educational void of such classes as media ethics and courses on the influence of media in American culture."
According to the minutes, "Robinson said that because all of the controversies have involved students who have taken one or more DPD course[s], she's not sure that moving up the requirement is the best solution to the problem and would like to look at other opportunities to help students increase their cultural awareness." USMC voting member Dennis Dugan suggested that the student group Team Liberation tailor training for Student Media. USMC voting member Matt Lewis mentioned that Barometer editor Andrew Nealon was already in the process of developing a diversity training program.
USMC voting faculty member Rick Brand was cited as saying, "One of the most powerful tools we have for learning are our mistakes, documenting incidents of the years and sharing them with the future staff could help barometer editors draw on the legacy of their predecessors." The committee unanimously voted to postpone the decision on the DPD requirement until the June 9, 2006 meeting. The USMC decided on June 9, 2006 to not accelerate the DPD requirement. The committee chose to leave the requirement as it was previously - requiring students to take a DPD course by the end of two registration periods after hiring. However, the committee decided to amend the requirement to apply to all student employees of Student Media. The committee also amended the requirement to not include summer term as part of the required two terms.
The policy is as follows (as of February 2009): All students employed by any branch of student media are required to enroll and complete a DPD course no later than two registration periods after their hiring. This excludes summer. Upon completion of a DPD course, the student is responsible to present proof of completion to the relevant manager/editor and adviser. Failure to follow this guideline is grounds for termination.