See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Print No Evil
By Aine O'Hare
Issue date: 11/17/05 Section: Editorial
Just how offensive does something have to be before it gets censored? How many people have to be offended and just how hard do the tears have to flow before apologies are issued and statements get retracted? Are there some ideas, opinions and words that, for all intents and purposes, are simply off-limits? Mr. Johnny Cash, the man in black himself, once claimed to walk the line, but just where is the line? Is it possible to walk it without completely losing one's balance?
College is often touted as the time to shake things up, shock others and explore taboos. University newspapers seem like the perfect place to do just that: publications run by the students, for the students. Ergo, the opinions section seems like the ideal platform for the airing of an individual's opinion, shaking and shocking though it may be. However, not all students share the same view, and what is acceptable to one can be offensive to another. Essentially, can an opinion ever be wrong?
The Strand, like every newspaper, occasionally runs into problems concerning what gets published. On any given day dozens of publications make it to newsstands that contain material which is potentially offensive. That model in the Toronto Star's Fashion section is promoting an impossible ideal of beauty, the expensive cars featured in the Wheels section promote gas consumption and environmental decay, the Business section reinforces class divisions… the ammunition is there and the trigger-finger of sensitivity is at the ready. Oops, gun imagery, there's a petition waiting to happen.
What makes this issue of censorship so effing touchy are the problems inherent in deciding when it's O.K. to appear biased and when it isn't. Obviously, opinion articles are biased and based solely on the views of an individual, and therefore should be treated with a certain amount of leeway. But when people feel antagonized by an opinion, should it ever make it to the public? Should the platform for student voices be roped-off? Is it fair to try and shut someone up because of what they have to say?
College is often touted as the time to shake things up, shock others and explore taboos. University newspapers seem like the perfect place to do just that: publications run by the students, for the students. Ergo, the opinions section seems like the ideal platform for the airing of an individual's opinion, shaking and shocking though it may be. However, not all students share the same view, and what is acceptable to one can be offensive to another. Essentially, can an opinion ever be wrong?
The Strand, like every newspaper, occasionally runs into problems concerning what gets published. On any given day dozens of publications make it to newsstands that contain material which is potentially offensive. That model in the Toronto Star's Fashion section is promoting an impossible ideal of beauty, the expensive cars featured in the Wheels section promote gas consumption and environmental decay, the Business section reinforces class divisions… the ammunition is there and the trigger-finger of sensitivity is at the ready. Oops, gun imagery, there's a petition waiting to happen.
What makes this issue of censorship so effing touchy are the problems inherent in deciding when it's O.K. to appear biased and when it isn't. Obviously, opinion articles are biased and based solely on the views of an individual, and therefore should be treated with a certain amount of leeway. But when people feel antagonized by an opinion, should it ever make it to the public? Should the platform for student voices be roped-off? Is it fair to try and shut someone up because of what they have to say?
