I smuggled a couple of banners into the spring 2002 commmencement
ceremony at OSU. One said "OSU loves free speech" and the other one
said "DISSENT IS NOT TREASON". I say "smuggled" because George Bush was
speaking, and the university had threatened to arrest protesters and
deny protesting students their college diplomas. Hence the Washington
Post could declare that Bush's "warm" reception at OSU was evidence of
his political strength. Stalin was also a strong political leader.
This photo of me and Shari Speer (also in the Department of
Linguistics) was never published. The news photographer who took the
photo called that "scary". The Columbus daily newspaper (The
Dispatch) published an editorial praising suppression of free speech
at Ohio State.
Here is my reply to the editor of the paper. They
decided not to print it.
----------------------
Dear Editor,
I love to go to commencement. Over my years at OSU, first as a
student and now as a faculty member, I've been to a dozen or more and
I still get a lump in my throat when I see the signs that say "thanks
mom and dad!", or "send money!", or "I did it!", or "WE did it!" I
love it when the vet students blow up their shoulder length bovine
examination gloves and wave them at the speaker, and when the
behavioral science students throw confetti, and when the nursing
students release their balloons, and when the champaign corks go
flying up out of the business school ranks. I even remember the year
that some of the dentistry students decided to "moon" President
Jennings, and had to take a little time-out from graduation the next
year. The celebration, the drama, and, well, the demonstrations are
all a part of what makes commencement so special to me.
But last friday I decided that I needed to do a little
demonstrating myself, so I smuggled in a banner that said "DISSENT IS
NOT TREASON". This university that I love and that I am committed to
threatened our students with expulsion from commencement, possible
arrest, and the denial of their college diplomas if they demonstrated
their opposition to the policies of George Bush. They were even told
that putting a peace sign on their mortar board cap was not
acceptable. When my students reported that these threats had been made
at the graduation practice I couldn't believe my ears! But several
students (of different political leanings) gave the same account.
I also knew that this was not an idle threat. Only a couple of
years ago family members of a graduating student were arrested when
Representative JC Watts of Oklahoma spoke at an OSU commencement.
They merely stood up and turned their backs on Rep. Watts - a silent,
non-violent (and legal) expression of disapproval of his policies.
They were charged with disturbing the peace and resisting arrest, were
led off in handcuffs, and had to pay hundreds of dollars in legal fees
as a result of these false charges.
Your editorial "A time and a place" (June 21) stated that, "OSU
officials likely are on safe grounds in imposing reasonable
restrictions on speech in Ohio Stadium because it is a forum that is
not traditionally opened for the purpose of public expression." This
is a very disappointing statement. What would the Dispatch do if
newspapers had to be smuggled in (like my protest banner) or be
confiscated? The stadium is not traditionally used for newspaper
reading, so would OSU be on safe ground to ban newspapers? Or what if
only the Dispatch (as an inappropriate newspaper) was confiscated, but
other acceptable newspapers were allowed in? This is what happened at
this year's graduation. There were demonstrations galore - thanking
parents, congratulating ourselves on a good job, or just looking
really cool to stand out in the crowd. In fact, there was a lot of
standing up and shouting. The only demonstrations that the OSU
administration prohibited, and threatened to punish, were the very
acts of free speech that are essential for the future health of our
democracy. The OSU administration chose decorum over democracy and I'm
ashamed to be associated with such an unAmerican policy. I think that
the people who formulated this policy betrayed our soldiers who are
serving throughout the world, because in our form of government, if we
have no dissent then we have no democracy. The "decorum" you get when
everybody has to "stay in line" is also called totalitarianism.
You at the Dispatch can believe that OSU is probably on "safe
grounds" in preventing citizens from publicly talking back to their
elected officials, because your newspaper is (so far) deemed
acceptable to those officials. However, what we saw at OSU is that if
those in power decide that the Dispatch is "out of line" you can also
be harassed and threatened. Your solution may be to try to stay in
line, but you can rest assured that your freedom to report the news
will keep shrinking so long as you "go along to get along." I am
deeply disappointed that the Dispatch would rather curb its own right
to free speech than stand up for the constitutional rights of Columbus
citizens.
Keith Johnson
Professor, Department of Linguistics
Ohio State University