Student Activity flier crackdown begs First Amendment issues

The Department of Student Activities is cracking down on advertising guidelines for student organizations, raising questions about First Amendment rights.

Student Activities is responsible for monitoring posted fliers for proper posting locations, expiration dates and content.

New regulations implemented by Student Activities will impose a strict penalty to organizations that do not follow the proper posting guidelines for fliers.

Assistant Director of Student Activities Ronald Lunk said the Recognized Student Organization meeting held on Monday, Oct. 18 specified the new penalties. Effective immediately, a $10 fine will be imposed for each flier that is posted improperly. There are no repercussions for expired fliers.

Lunk said Student Activities is open to suggestions from students on how to prevent the layering of fliers. Currently, there are no repercussions for this either.

Limitations are also imposed on which organizations are permitted to post fliers on campus. Organizations must be approved as “recognized student organizations” by Student Activities. Director of Campus Life and Activities Thomas Miles said that the Board of Regents requires all student organizations to register with their university.

Student Activities has a set of guidelines that qualify an organization as an RSO. An organization must: have a mailbox housed in the office of student activities, use university facilities and equipment, use GC&SU in their title, solicit memberships on campus, register their group annually and classify them accordingly, must participate in the student organizational fair, fundraise on campus and co-sponsor with the Campus Activities Board or other RSOs.

All distributed fliers must gain approval before being posted. Miles said all administrative staff within Student Activities are involved in the approval process.

Lunk said, however, that the process is based largely on opinion and judgement.

“It’s really a personal, very [subjective decision]…Basically one of the things that we try to make sure of is that there is nothing offensive to anybody, whether that be women, or a minority group, or a culture…But at the same time we don’t want to be a censoring body either,” Lunk said.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits “abridging the freedom of speech.”

Both Lunk and Miles feel as though there is not a violation of First Amendment rights through the current approval process.

“We understand that there is freedom of expression…but there is a line that you cross when certain things are displayed,” said Lunk.

Lunk identified alcohol, nudity and illegal substances as “the big three” that are not tolerated on any level. Organizations must replace “alcohol” with “refreshments.”

Anything that would allude to the harm of any individual or group is also not tolerated.

“We try to show people that there are other ways of advertising without being…inappropriate in a public environment,” Lunk said. “There are standards that this university has to have.”

Lunk said it is important to have a system where fliers must be pre-approved before posting because GC&SU is a public school.

“I think that…groups and community members who post on campus understand what is appropriate and what is not appropriate…We are a public school, and the campus is open to community members…they make sure that its appropriate for anyone in the community,” Lunk said

Specific situations when material is “obscene” or “inappropriate” are taken into account, but Lunk said this generally does not create a problem. The only flier he could recall being deemed inappropriate was one that included a photograph of a nude woman being attacked.

Politics professor Kathleen Martin said that student activities are justified in their actions of regulating advertising.

“I believe GC&SU has the authority to impose mechanisms and/or standards for posting fliers…just as governmental authorities can determine what can and cannot be posted-and where. The same goes with content on fliers,” Martin said. “The more important point is that the process of establishing any regulation…should include students having a voice in the decision making.”

Martin said it is “imperative” that more than one person should have authority to make such decisions.

“If something is questionable, which is rare…I use a reasonable person standard. This means that I will ask a number of random people, including students, if they believe it is inappropriate,” Miles said.

Miles said the Student Government Association represents the voice of the student body in this matter, and the Student Handbook provides the general guidelines that determine policies.

Posted by Colonnade Archives on Oct 29 2004. Filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry