FIRE: Burn, Baby, Burn

By Alston B. Ramsay | Thursday, October 23, 2003

It recently came to the Review's attention that we weren't the only ones fighting the College's new delivery policy. In fact, since last spring, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), a non-partisan, non-profit organization, has been watching Parkhurst intently (see page 8). They were bothered enough that they sent a letter to President Wright claiming that, among other things, ?[b]y restricting written expression in those very areas where your students live, study, and socialize, you send the message that speech is to be feared, restrained, and monitored.?

Wow, that's pretty damning, but it doesn't end there: Dartmouth's policy is ?completely incompatible with a free society and stands in stark opposition to the ideals of higher education.?

Those are some pretty heavy charges. One might expect that Dartmouth would take them to heart, but, then again, that would assume that the administration here responded to logic. Instead, Robert Donin, the College's chief counsel, responded a week later (see page 9) writing that the main rationale behind the College's decision was a "desire to reduce litter in College residence halls." Come again? Litter?

Further, Mr. Donin vehemently denied that there even was a policy restricting freedom of the press. Apparently he doesn't think threatening students delivering newspapers with all sorts of punishments?even losing housing privileges—restricts the freedom of the press.

The new policy is bad, and it certainly does restrict the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, but some of its recent aftershocks are truly disturbing. The Dartmouth Free Press?a college-funded, "recognized," liberal publication, and the Review's polar opposite on most political issues—delivered its first issue during Freshman Week, only to be met with shrill e-mails from those in charge of the Committee on Student Organizations (COSO). When members of the paper's staff started explaining that the policy was bogus, they were told that, if they went door to door again, they would have their funding "reviewed." I spoke with Lena Previll, one of the top administrators for COSO, and she "didn't remember" any e-mails to that effect (the Free Press staff certainly did; they even double-checked that she had sent them), but she did say that any infraction by the Free Press would be sent to either COSO?which funds student groups—or the Organizational Adjudication Committee?which metes out punishments to recognized organizations. The plot thickens.

It seems, then, that College recognition is about one thing and one thing only: Control. More disturbing, however, is the chilling effect this has already had on campus discourse. The Free Press no longer debates the Review in the open (they deliver to the basements, you see), and they're afraid to editorialize about the delivery policy, which they hate, lest they have their funding "reviewed."

And when you're not recognized—like The Dartmouth Review—the College uses whatever resources it has under its control to bring you in line. So far this term they've threatened my staff and me a number of times for delivering, and they threatened to call the police to have Review students forcibly removed from the student center [See TDR 8/29/03].Over the summer, they sent a representative to testify against us at a Hanover zoning hearing—even though the representative didn't really know why he was there (see page 9).

The petty threats haven't prevented the Review from arriving on anyone's doorstep (although some UGAs, mine included, may have removed them), and no one read the last issue of the Free Press because it went directly to the basement tables. Dartmouth claims that anecdotal evidence from the summer suggests that the new delivery policy works. That's strange: Only one publication—the Free Press—delivered in the summer, and it went door to door.

No, this policy has already proven to be a dismal failure, and the longer it stays in place, the more damage it does to the very bedrock of this institution, and the higher the potential for another embarassing escapade with the national media. But still, Dartmouth officially maintains that the freedom of the press is being protected, and administrators boisterously proclaim their love of free speech. As this issue attests, the College isn't fooling anyone.

FIRE: Burn, Baby, Burn

Article Tools

Related Articles