Nebraska High School Shuts Down 54-Year-Old School Newspaper After Students Publish LGBT Pieces
This is a clear attempt by the administration to tamp down on opinions the adults don't like.

You don't have to read very far between the lines to figure out why the journalism program at Northwest High School in Grand Island, Nebraska, was shut down in June.
Before school administrators went mum as the press started investigating what had happened, students and school board staff had been made well aware that the administrators did not like what the newspaper was publishing. The Grand Island Independent—which also printed the school's newspaper, Viking Saga—reports that the school's year-end newspaper had a number of LGBT-related stories and discussed the origins of Pride Month in June. The issue also included several stories that weren't about LGBT issues, but it seems it was all the nonheterosexual content that did them in:
Northwest Public Schools board Vice President Zach Mader said that in the past, "I do think there have been talks of doing away with our newspaper if we were not going to be able to control content that we saw (as) inappropriate."
He cautiously explained the apparent reason for the Saga's demise.
"The very last issue that came out this year, there was… a little bit of hostility amongst some," the school board member said. "There were editorials that were essentially, I guess what I would say, LGBTQ."
The school had been publishing the newspaper for 54 years. Four days after that issue was printed in May, a school district employee contacted the Grand Island Independent press to cancel printing services. The Northwest employee, in an email, said that the school was ending the journalism program "because the school board and superintendent are unhappy with the last issue's editorial content."
To make it clear that it wasn't the article about the achievements of Future Business Leaders of America that triggered the drastic decision, The Grand Island Independent also reports that in April, students who worked on the Viking Saga were reprimanded by district officials for publishing their "preferred pronouns" and using their preferred names in their bylines. They were ordered to use their birth names, which was a problem for a trans student who was working at the newspaper.
At first glance, one can think that this might not be censorship, that perhaps the school is thinking of changing the curriculum and is making some cuts. But Northwest Public Schools Director of Teaching and Learning Jeanette Ramsey, who told The Grand Island Independent that she was the primary decision maker about the school's curriculum, washed her hands of what happened to the journalism program. "I was not involved in that decision at all. I was zero involved in that decision," she told The Grand Island Independent. The journalism teacher declined to be interviewed.
Despite the recent uptick in culture war battles over public school curricula and LGBT issues, these kinds of school press battles between students and administrators about censorship have been going on for decades. In 1988, the Supreme Court gave school administrators wide authority to censor school newspapers in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, despite the 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District decision that ruled that students do not lose their First Amendment freedoms on school grounds.
Completely shutting down a newspaper is a pretty crappy decision from a public education perspective. If education in writing and debate is one of the fundamental expectations of a public school, the student newspaper has long been a place for teens to practice these skills. The complaint by administrators isn't about the quality of writing by the students; they don't like what the students are saying and the decisions they're making. Would the school cancel an entire English class if it didn't like the opinions students were expressing in their essays?
We would hope not, but the difference here is that the opinions and thoughts of the students are being widely distributed through Viking Saga. And so this is clearly an attempt by the administration to tamp down on opinions the adults don't like. This isn't about controlling teachers who express "woke" opinions in classrooms in ways that might not be appropriate for class discussions; it's about censoring students for expressing "woke" opinions in spaces that make adults uncomfortable.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Build your own student newspaper.
Clearly that's the next step, and fortunately, nowadays it's very easy to do. They might even get a greater readership - "read the newspaper they tried to stop!" - and that would be a decidedly positive outcome.
Banned in Nebraska!
I'd read that publication.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got 13,000 us dollars only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details
going to this web-link… https://changeyourlife4.neocities.org/
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. (res-08) I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details
.
going to this article… https://workofferweb24.netlify.app/
Oh, if only there was a way for high school student to share their ideas and insights in a forum all their peers could access, maybe a blog on the internet?
Of course, the issue is they want this for their college applications - self-publishing, without faculty guidance and oversight doesn't impress college recruiters.
Perhaps the teens should have realized who held control over the program (hint, it wasn't the HS students), and not filled their last issue of the year with content they knew would trigger the administration.
What vital LGBTQ insights did they share in their last issue?
This paper had advertisers and came out under the name of the public school system, why did these kids think they could act unilaterally and with inpugnity?
"why did these kids think they could act unilaterally and with inpugnity?"
What part of public school students did you miss?
"Of course, the issue is they want this for their college applications - self-publishing, without faculty guidance and oversight doesn't impress college recruiters."
I'm pretty sure "we continued to self-publish our pro-LGBT school newspaper after homophobic faculty shut it down" would go over very well with recruiters.
"Perhaps the teens should have realized who held control over the program (hint, it wasn't the HS students), and not filled their last issue of the year with content they knew would trigger the administration."
It may "trigger the administration", but it would probably get them points with College Recruiters.
In 1988, the Supreme Court gave school administrators wide authority to censor school newspapers in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, despite the 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District decision that ruled that students do not lose their First Amendment freedoms on school grounds.
FYI, everyone knows students don't have first amendment rights on school grounds. And the left are the first end of the spectrum to say as much. To wit:
At the end of the day it’s the SCHOOL that publishes the school newspaper. Not the students.
Bong hits for Jesus agrees.
More likely supply chain issues - - - - - - - - - -
Another reason schooling should be private then shutting down the school paper is no big deal.
That might even be an argument in favour of public schooling - that shutting down a paper would be such a big deal.
Boot licker
This is a good foreshadowing of their side's own repressive tolerance getting shoved down their throats.
“It’s only about ‘justice’ when
WE do it!”
And Go ‘Huskers!
I guess those students need to learn to code.
Perhaps the school realized that there are too many Journalism Major college students and are just doing their best to prevent those students from working towards a worthless degree. They're saving students and their parents (and the taxpayers) money. Good work!
CB
This! All the world needs is more pro-LGBTQFJB journalists.
What I like best here is the adults simply acted and didn't think it necessary to explain or get into 'debate' with kids and their childish attitude about e.g. legal names vs. anything goes attitude.
Yes, but now we have children like Scott writing articles of supposition with zero support. I notice he sheds exactly zero words on the substance of the articles at issue and whether or not they're high school newspaper appropriate and instead insists the only preferred pronouns and name are at issue.
Yeah, because student newspapers are known for unrestrained hard-hitting investigative journalism.
SMDH.
If you have a newsletter, sir, I would like to subscribe to it, forthwith.
...in April, students who worked on the Viking Saga were reprimanded by district officials for publishing their "preferred pronouns" and using their preferred names in their bylines. They were ordered to use their birth names, which was a problem for a trans student who was working at the newspaper.
In fact, if anyone has ever paid any attention at all, students have just about no rights at all. You can search them and their belongings with no probable cause and no one bats an eye, but god forbid they publish their sexual proclivities and get shut down over it.
Also one might be curious if the author of this article actually went to journalism school since a trans-activist working at a student newspaper in a conservative town might want to consider their audience when writing stories instead of being a full-bore activist. One would think Scott should know this, given that they are a 'journalist', but apparently he flunked his Intro to Media class.
Also, writing under an assumed name, pen name, or pseudonym, has a long and storied history in Western Civilization. Neither the State nor private media companies are required to publish pseudonymous work de facto and actually have obligations against plagiarism, libel, and fraud that encourage them not to do so. They may, of course, choose to forego those obligations at their relatively full discretion but that, as part of their full discretion, doesn't obligate them to broadly accept any/all pseudonyms for any reason.
But I'm just spitballing from what I've heard as a libertarian in an electorate informed by a fair and honest media. Maybe I inferred it from a list of supposed human rights or something. It's not like I've sat through any classes on the ethics of journalism like Scott has.
One doesn't make it out of journalism school without taking at least one class that points out that writing opinion stories that are sure to piss off the vast majority of people that read your work is a sure fire way to get shit canned. Writing trans-activist stories in a paper read by a bunch of religious or conservative kids and parents being one such example.
The reason the paper was likely shut down, and this is pure speculation based on what I know of student papers, is because the teacher that runs the student newspaper was probably encouraging this stuff and they decided the nuke the whole thing from orbit just to be sure.
The teacher that ran it was also probably fired, and without an 'adult' to supervise the paper there probably won't be a paper.
The reason the paper was likely shut down, and this is pure speculation based on what I know of student papers, is because the teacher that runs the student newspaper was probably encouraging this stuff and they decided the nuke the whole thing from orbit just to be sure.
I don't think this speculation is very far off. As I state below, what got published was pretty on-par for Scott's obfuscation of the facts and pretty far afoul of not just journalistic integrity norms, but arguably non-journalistic integrity norms as well. If the Journalism or English or whatever teacher OK'ed this for publication, regardless of the politics, they should've been dismissed with prejudice.
My first thought was that the paper probably became less of a newspaper and more of an LGBTQABCXYZ++ piece of activism. No doubt some rainbow haired teacher was "helping" them push it out. I suspect no matter the case there was a better way to handle it than squashing the paper.
I suspect no matter the case there was a better way to handle it than squashing the paper.
Apply for a job at the Nebraska school district. I'm sure with your qualifications and keen ability to resolve all problems from beyond 30K feet, you'll be a shoe in. With your English/Journalism Ed. friend's credentials *and* your recommendation, they'll be shoe in too. Hell, why pick a friend? Just get all the HS English/Journalism Ed. majors who are willing to relocate to Nebraska with you together, and you can all apply together!
I have to agree. This is just so egregious that I find the author's flat acceptance of the story as presented by the aggrieved parties to be malpractice.
Was it perhaps "you are a student paper. Write articles about the football team and knock off all political topics"? Using the student paper for outright political proselytization is not acceptable.
The fact that there isn't an official reply is just despicable.
We need more orbiting nukes.
"an electorate informed by a fair and honest media."
What universe are you from? Because it obviously isn't this one.
Same Universe, just a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.
They were told not to use preferred names, pronouns, etc, and they did.
This is just an opportunity for the students to secure outside funding for their activist newspaper?
“Fair and honest media” (snort).
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details
going to this article…
What's the point of going into such a poorly compensated and poorly respected career path if not to make it all about MEEEEEEEEEE?
To every smart, ambitious young person in Nebraska:
Get the fuck out of Nebraska as soon as you can; likely this will be immediately following high school graduation.
Go to a successful, modern, educated city; a strong, liberal-libertarian (not religious) university or college; or, ideally, both. There you will find the education, modernity, and economic opportunity that will position you for a productive, enjoyable life.
Nebraska is a desolate, can't-keep-up backwater fit solely for half-educated, roundly bigoted, childishly superstitious hayseeds. You do not belong in Nebraska; you should not stay for a minute longer than necessary.
Choose and rely on reason, education, inclusiveness, science, modernity, progress, freedom, and tolerance. Avoid ignorance, superstition, bigotry, backwardness, insularity, authoritarianism, dogma, and pining for illusory good old days.
When you leave Nebraska, never return. The depleted human residue you will leave behind has nothing worthwhile to offer you. You can succeed despite behind dealt a substandard hand so far. I will be rooting for you, as will many other Americans.
Good luck with respect to getting the fuck out of Nebraska!
Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Left and toleration of movements from the Right. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: ... it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word.
The whole post-marxist period is one of clear and present danger.
Consequently, true pacification requires the withdrawal of tolerance before the deed, at the stage of communication in word, print, and picture. Such extreme suspension of the right of free speech and free assembly is indeed justified only if the whole of society is in extreme danger. I maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal state of affairs. Different opinions and ‘philosophies’ can no longer compete peacefully for adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the ‘marketplace of ideas’ is organized and delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest.
Also, LOL at the slack-jawed, slope-foreheaded hicklib's rejection-obsessed emotional state.
"depleted human residue"
Wow, that's a major rhetorical escalation even for Kirkland.
Godwin-level rhetoric.
He misspelled “lebensunwertesleben.”
Lincoln's pretty fancy and modern. So is Omaha.
Kirkland’s never actually been anywhere far from his mom’s basement.
"The depleted human residue you will leave behind has nothing worthwhile to offer you."
Otherwise known as your parents, the people that brought you into the world (chose not to abort them), fed them, educated them, and cared for them...
But yeah, Pride Month, that's the battle worth fighting...
Here's a tip, when the owner/publisher of your paper tells you not to do something, and you decide to do it anyway, expect the opportunity to find a new employer.
Eat shit and die, asshole bigot.
https://issuu.com/vikingsaga/docs/nwv05132022t01
If anyone wants to read the controversial student newspaper at issue. If you ask me, the thing that got the school board's attention were the two editorials. They include all the insight you'd expect from high-schools talking about political issues.
Holy Fuck! I mean, I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but by Scott's telling I (again, silly me) was prepared for an impartial or even slanted retelling of the history of pride month or whatever. But a piece titled "Science Of Gender" that says, "Transitioning from male to female is not as accessible but is definitely worth the effort."? I mean even, "Being transgender is not a choice or something that can be avoided. It is a psychological chemical difference." is rather overtly anti-educational.
Yeah, you need to shit-can your student editor and give the journalism teacher a verbal warning for that and if you can't shit-can your editor, you need to shut the paper down.
If they'd published a piece saying "Being Scientologist is not a choice or something that can be avoided. It is the psychological and chemical embodiment of living as a Thetan." and "Being a upper-level Operating Thetan is well worth the effort." the school would've been perfectly correct to shut that shit down.
Ffs, Scott is such a dishonest hack.
"It is a psychological chemical difference" is 'biology is destiny' writ small.
Not merely ignorant, but objectively anti humanist.
And these people think themselves to be the 'free thinkers.'
Entirely unsurprising that Shackford is running cover for them.
Of course the combination of his byline and any lack of links to the actual problematic pieces already told me that there was something being hidden.
Schadenfreude: noun. The simultaneous joy derived from seeing irrefutable proof of Tony/Joe Friday's HS-level intellect and the recognition of the harm done by the fact that a HS student's thinking may never progress beyond it.
Thanks. I was going to ask why the actual content wasn't presented by Scott?
Edit: site not working for me. Is mad casual’s example the best of it, or is there more?
My connection's pretty fast and it took a minute or two to load.
The two editorial pieces are as I described and the quotes are accurate. The rest of the paper is pretty standard, banal fare.
Congrats to Olivia Sargent on winning All-Conference in the Senior Female division of Trap and Skeet!
I guess I should add that I've used Isuu before in the past and may or may not have jumped through hoops to get it working for me.
Not only does the site not work for me, but it crashes my browser, both Firefox and Chrome and both are current versions.
Yeah, that site wasn't really that great, but it's what a public high school was using to host its online newspaper, so I wasn't expecting slick and professional. I had a huge ad on the page that stalled the load for about a solid minute when I was waiting for it to come up.
so I wasn't expecting slick and professional
If one were looking for back issues of mainstream magazines published 20 or more years ago without having to pay to by a subscription fee to get through paywalls erected since the time one absolutely purchased said issue, it's a decent site. Or used to be.
*Rubs temples* Buy a subscription
"...I had a huge ad on the page that stalled the load for about a solid minute when I was waiting for it to come up..."
Must have asked Reason for a referral to a host.
Also, to give a quick rough summary: The transgender student wrote an editorial about the "Don't Say Gay" bill that clearly assumed the bill made it illegal to say "gay" in all schools for all grades. It also repeats phrases clearly read or heard elsewhere, such as this: "The descriptions of limitations in the bill are so general they will most likely be interpreted differently by each team of school administrators, meaning the effects of the bill will be unknown." Also this beautiful nugget: "If the concern was really the quality of education of our children, why not ban all discussion of sex and romance entirely? If we aren't saying 'gay', why can we say 'straight?'"
The even worse editorial is titled "The Science of Gender," which is decidedly anti-science. It opens thusly:
"The definition of gender is a subcategory within a grammatical class of a language that is partly arbitrary (based on random choice or personal whim). Gender is also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (such as shape, social rank, manner or existence of sex)."
She goes on to explain that the reason people have gender dysphoria is because they have hormones that don't align with their sex, that symptoms of gender dysphoria include a desire to change pronouns (clearly nobody is teaching children about circular logic), and resisting gendered stereotypes...which, holy shit. Then concludes on this note:
"Do not feel ashamed or guilty for wishing to feel comfortable. Changing one's physical appearance doesn't negatively affect anyone. Being transgender does not mean being a bad human. Your mind will thank you.
Your mind will thank you."
because they have hormones that don't align with their sex
Getting a bit nitpicky (not a criticism of you) but, the actual statement is "Males and females have specific brain structure. There's different hormones in each brain. When the hormones don't line up, it causes gender dysphoria." which is so utterly unscientific and 'not even wrong' it makes the proponents of phrenology look exceedingly brilliant for their then-contemporary lack of understanding.
"Males and females have specific brain structure. There's different hormones in each brain. When the hormones don't line up, it causes gender dysphoria."
So, rather than seeking to align the hormones (as if this were actually the problem) it is so much better to mutilate the anatomy!
Also note the admission that their approach still leaves the subject with a mis-aligned "brain structure."
So, not merely factually ignorant, but also plain old stupid.
"There's different hormones..."
I guess she's also trans grammar.
It's not entirely wrong. The behavioral differences between men and women are due to neurological differences that are established in the womb due to exposure to hormones. It's the same for any animal - it's why male and female animals grow up knowing the sex-typical behavior for their species, like vocalizations. Where the writer is wrong is that any ongoing differences aren't due to current hormones in the blood; it's only the hormones present during development.
Homosexual orientation is almost certainly caused by this. One experiment showed that if you inject female rat fetuses with excess testosterone, they will be attracted to other females when they reach adulthood. Gender dysphoria might have a similar root, but frankly no one's sure. The current theories about transgenderism are just that: theories. Prior to the 2010s, only a very small percentage of people were so afflicted by gender dysphoria that they considered gender reassignment surgery, and normally these people were men who had manifested gender dysphoria since early childhood.
THX
It's not entirely wrong.
No, it is. Nor is any part of what you defecated in support of it, even by your own advocacy bullshit. For most people, it would be embarrassing to trip over their own turds in public and then roll around in it, but for retards like you it seems like you can't help it. Hormonal milieu or not.
So, which is it, fixed at birth or fluid? Well more than half of people who suffer gender dysphoria revert to a non-dysphoric state without intervention. Plenty of individuals openly admit they're straight or gay for decades and then change their mind. Did their gestational hormonal milieu change and then change back? Did their brain structure re-wire itself in the overwhelming presence of cis-gendered hormones? How about actual hermaphroditic individuals and people with Kleinfelters Syndrome? Did in utero hormones determine their genetics after fertilization?
You dumb fucks don't give a shit about facts, biology, or even humans cis- or trans-. You just want to roll around in your own shit and pretend that everybody else is wrong for not thinking you're all geniuses for doing so. Get the fuck out with your bullshit.
*Dons suit of armor and grabs sword*
Who was running this program?
So in short they were abysmal failures as journalists but crack propagandists for the leftwing cult of crazy. Yeah, I can see why Scott was so up to defend them but not publish any hint of the actual issue.
Wasn't appreciably worse than Reason.
This is not praise, mind you.
Kids are free to start their own paper of they want. Schools don't have to fund every desire of an activist.
Oddly there were zero competing articles to counter the editorial. If a conservative district, was there any attempt to provide multiple perspectives or was the person in charge single sided?
Unless Scott has information more than the bias from a disappointed activist, not sure he can make the claims foe the reasons. Was it a budget issue? Lack of interest? What were the specifics?
This is basically all im seeing.
Officials overseeing the district, which is based in Grand Island, have not said when or why the decision was made to eliminate the student paper. But an email from a school employee to the Independent cancelling the student paper’s printing services on May 22 said it was “because the school board and superintendent are unhappy with the last issue’s editorial content.”
One sided perspective.
So, like what A Thinking Mind said above, it was the trans cult recruitment editorials more than anything else.
Yeah, I can understand why a school board might be touchy about that these days, considering how eager some of these activist teachers are to bring more alienated marxists in to the fold while encouraging teenagers to mutilate themselves for a cultural fashion trend.
There is no counter-information to the T agenda. (I don't equate LGBQ with T. T is very very different.)
If you say "no actually......" you are then a Nazi who wants to send all T to gas chambers. Less than 100% support is literal Hitler. You want literal Hitler to get a counterpoint column? What does that make you?
Just repeating clearly what Scott can't say out loud for everyone to hear:
"Transitioning from male to female is not as accessible but is definitely worth the effort." - Hiapatia McIntosh, Science of Gender, Viking Saga, Vol. 59, Issue 8
Fucking Conservative Nebraska Republicans and their "Don't Have Kids Tell Other Kids To Have Sex Changes" laws.
Maybe it's still something we should allow under free speech. The problem is that mocking what these students are writing and saying would almost become a hate crime, and students would likely be punished for making fun of how shitty their ideas are. So it's not really free speech, it's getting ratcheted one direction.
But even if I concede that shutting down the newspaper was a bad idea, I don't really blame the school board for reading that and thinking "What the fuck?"
Maybe it's still something we should allow under free speech.
Nope. It's not even clear "Have elective surgery, it's worth it." is legal if they were publishing an independent newsletter. I'd agree that the school has no business shutting it down. But if someone filed a lawsuit saying, "They told me it was worth it!" and the court said, "They aren't doctors. They can't give medical advice." I don't exactly see a factual inaccuracy and do see a lot of undoing of rather reasonable, even by libertarian standards, jurisprudence.
Further, given that the school district I live in, in a not-so-isolated incident, disciplined several HS girls for posting their initials ('K,K, and K') to Twitter at a 'white out' (homecoming football) party, fuck activist trannies giving armchair medical advice in the school paper.
"They aren't doctors. They can't give medical advice."
Since it does not appear any of them were representing themselves as licensed medical practitioners then this is highly unlikely and, more broadly speaking, it would be grossly inappropriate for any court to do so.
Otherwise those of us who do routinely criticize actual medical professionals for their sex-change insanity could face similar sanction.
Since it does not appear any of them were representing themselves as licensed medical practitioners then this is highly unlikely and, more broadly speaking, it would be grossly inappropriate for any court to do so.
So you're saying she was suggesting a homeopathic MtF transitioning method? For a minor, yes it would be inappropriate for a judge to do that. For a medical professional, no, it would not. Actual doctors get sued for bad medical advice all the time. Matter of fact, actual doctors get sued for good medical practice and, according to SCOTUS, can't claim their medical expertise in their own defense. So fuck your "She gets special privilege because she's trans." bullshit.
You are missing the point. You can only be guilty of practicing medicine without a license if you represent yourself as a medical practitioner. Opining on the practice of medicine alone is not an offense.
Re-read what I said.
And, if hen you syill want to argue things I NEVER SAID, the go fuck yourself too.
You are missing the point.
I think you missed my point. It's not entirely clear that "Harm yourself, it's worth it." is protected free speech. Even if you think it should be, there are all kinds of situations for all kinds of medical and non-medical professionals where mandatory reporting is mandatory and telling (e.g.) a bulimic minor just to eat less constitutes a form of abuse. I'm not saying that's what she did and that she *should* be convicted of it. I'm saying it's not entirely clear it's free speech even if she were publishing it independently. And that's setting aside the fact that, apparently, "Pray the gay away" and "No, I won't put your preferred cake topper on your wedding cake for you." aren't clear cut cases of free speech. Taking it to absolute extremes: even though Jim Jones only forced a small portion of his followers to drink the kool aid, we can pretty much agree that, at some point, whether it was fraud or other, he was pretty far afoul of free speech.
"It's not entirely clear that "Harm yourself, it's worth it." is protected free speech. "
Perhaps. But we are talking about actual sanctioned medical practices (albeit highly controversial ones.) In that sense it is not different from advocating for tummy tucks or boob implants. Both of which would do harm to an otherwise normal healthy body.
The degree of harm, to be sure, is way more profound when talking about things like elective castration or hysterectomy, but if they are already happening then people should be free to opine on them in either direction.
"Maybe it's still something we should allow under free speech."
I'll give them the same free speech they provide others. Which ain't much.
Would it be the same ef they were pushing Nazi propaganda? No handwringing about that parallel? Wonder why.
Let's reframe this:
Kids get practical lesson about the Open Society and Its Enemies
Let's reframe this:
"SRG Literally Encourages HS Kids To Play Doctor With Specifically Depression And Suicide-Prone Student Population"
Yeah, where by "open society", you mean "let kids run wild and do whatever they want, with the support of Soros's billions".
It's a good lesson for them to learn that until they have reached the age of majority, their parents make decisions for them.
You're not much of a free speech fan, I take it.
Government funded speech is never free speech.
Fuck off slaver.
It is if it's done with no strings attached. Cotinue to fuck off, you axiomatic clown.
"With no strings attached"
Lol. Do they each get a pony too?
Apologies, I thought I was addressing an adult.
"It is if it's done with no strings attached..."
As a lefty shit, SRG fantasizes that stories on NPR aren't biased in the least.
I don't see what "free speech" has to do with what books are available at government-run schools.
Whose "free speech" do you think removing a book from a public school library infringes upon?
(sorry, wrong article, this was about the student newspaper)
No, there is no "free speech" in student publications at government run schools either.
If you want free speech, you can publish it on your own, not under the banner of a government institution.
"let kids run wild and do whatever they want, with the support of Soros's billions"
They weren't running wild. See schadenfreude above. They were parroting, virtually word-for-word, any one of Tony/Joe Friday/SRG's talking points on the matter. If they got back from North Korea acting like that, everyone would rightly recognize they'd been brainwashed. If they walked out of the Nebraska woods covered in dirt and published an article saying "I was one with the trees, man. Everyone should experience nature." I think the biggest problem would've been that they needed a bath, and the paper would still be publishing.
You clearly don't understand that a reasonable approach would be to ask to have a counter-argument published in the same magazine - perhaps giving one of the other kids a chance to write such a thing. Or perhaps, establish another newspaper representing opposing views. But you prefer to censor. Gottit.
Telling 16yo kids what they can and can't print is anti-free speech . It also seems that you only disapprove of brain washing when it's done by the wrong people.
There is no counter-argument and you're just butthurt because people won't celebrate your religion in the school paper. As I posted above, her science is just as much if not more flawed than phrenology or the Nazis or Soviets understanding of genetics and if she'd posted "Convert to Islam/Judaism/Christianity/Flat Eartherism/Creationism/Christian Science/Scientology, it's worth it." and the school shut down the paper no one would, rightfully, bat an eye.
I disapprove of the brainwashing when it's done in the school paper. It seems you approve of brainwashing in school newspapers when you think it's the right people doing it.
It's not a "magazine", it's a student newspaper at a public school. As such, it is under the control of the school and the parents.
The students can publish whatever they want to... on their own time and under their own banner. Even then, they need the permission of their parents unless they are adults.
"...You clearly don't understand that a reasonable approach would be to ask to have a counter-argument published in the same magazine - perhaps giving one of the other kids a chance to write such a thing. Or perhaps, establish another newspaper representing opposing views..."
Followed by:
"...Telling 16yo kids what they can and can't print is anti-free speech..."
So if SRG is allowed to tell them what to publish, it's free speech, but if someone else does, well...
I don't want to tell anyone what to publish. I am suggesting what might be an appropriate solution. I guess you're too stupid to tell the difference.
Funnily enough you seem fine with the school telling them, in effect, what not to publish.
Nope, the school did NOT tell the students "what not to publish" they told the students what they could not publish under the schools banner and at taxpayer cost.
I am sure if YOU sent the students money, or sent payment to the printer, the students (and you) would have no problem exercising your right to publish.
"Kids get practical lesson about the Open Society and Its Enemies"
Kids Get Hoisted On the Petard of "Free Speech Does Not Mean Freedom from Consequences"
"Free Speech Does Not Mean Freedom from Consequences"
True. But if the consequences only flow from the fact of the speech itself rather than the effects of the speech, the speech isn't free. That is, if someone is told, "you are free to say what you like and if we don't like it, we're free to expel you", that's not free speech in the first place.
But if the consequences only flow from the fact of the speech itself rather than the effects of the speech, the speech isn't free.
The consequences flowed from the use of public resources. As I and others said above, if they were telling their friends getting a sex change was worth it by word of mouth or handing out flyers, the school would've been wrong to banish that speech. Especially if it were happening off campus or after-hours. But not only is that not the case here but in other cases where it was the situation, students were punished by the school for their speech. You and these kids don't want free speech, you want "free speech for me, not for thee", so fuck it. You don't give a shit about free speech, what am I losing by not observing yours, civility? Fuck your bad faith bullshit. Civility left the room when dumb fucks like you said, "Words are violence." You clearly don't understand what free speech means and have forgotten the lessons that taught most other humans words are not violence.
That is, "in other cases where it was the situation with different speech..."
As noted previously, these kids want the school support and backing for their cult insanity but would be the first to demand sanctions against anyone who criticized or mocked them for their stupidity and dishonesty
Then if they were to demand sanctions, you'd be entitled to criticise them for it. Have they done so?
And free speech is not just for nice decent people you approve of.
Quite right. Underage students at a public school do not have a free speech right to use the school newspaper to voice their opinions.
As a matter of principle rather than law, why should 16you be denied free speech?
I didn't say that they should be "denied free speech."
I said that they have no right to use the school newspaper for their speech, just like I don't have a right to use the NYT for my free speech.
Do you understand the difference between a state HS and the NYT as venues for speech?
Do you?
Yes, which is why the school newspaper handled this issue differently from the NYT.
The fact remains that students have no free speech right to publishing in the school newspaper.
I did not see any effort the expel the students. The school, on the behalf of the taxpayers who own the paper, decided to stop publishing ideas they don't approve of.
In short, the paper is the speech of the owners of the paper. They exercised their free speech rights to a) decide what ideas they want to pay for and b) to stop publishing the paper they own.
The OWNERS of the paper exercised their free speech rights. The students still have the right to publish .... if they pay for it.
Seems like an overreaction from the school.
You're buying Scott's false narrative:
"Transitioning from male to female is not as accessible but is definitely worth the effort." - Hiapatia McIntosh, Science of Gender, Viking Saga, Vol. 59, Issue 8
As I said, I was almost fully expecting a semi-factual recanting of notable events from Stonewall to today or some speculative fictional history of Abe Lincoln's homosexuality or Casmir Pulaski's sex and an overreation from the administration. That's not what this was. The student near literally and seemingly in earnest said, "Convert to Christianity/Islam/Scientology/a Non-binary gender/Flat Eartherism/Creationism, it's worth it." A statement/article, virtually nobody of any of the other various flavors listed (and others) wouldn't completely understand the admin for pulling.
This was almost certainly baiting from an activist teacher without whom the paper doesn't get published. A teacher effectively told the administration/district, publish my preferred political opinion pieces or don't publish and they decided not to publish.
OK, I suppose I can see the perspective that the Supreme Court was wrong and a public-school newspaper which is part of the school curriculum can't be censored. I mean, it's a dumb perspective but at least it's an ethos.
But what happened to the standard free speech argument that "this content is offensive, which makes it all the more important to protect free press, because unless you stand up for the most extreme statements there's no real free expression" etc. That's what they say about "right-wing" speech.
But in this case, we get a really vague (and cleaned-up) description of the speech in question, and a dismissive reference to "opinions the adults don't like."
Is that what they'd call it if a bunch of students wanted to get together, wave the Confederate flag, and chant "white power"? Opinions the adults don't like?
As if it were all subjective, and what is truth, if you know what I mean?
Yeah if i wrote an op-ed saying that "41% is a rookie number we ought to push that up to 100%" and then called for the lynching of all these drag story time people as a bunch of disgusting perverts, in say a berkeley high school newspaper would scott even cover it?
He would but he'd be condemning the attack on others such actions represent.
Scott you are writing for a loser publication that panders to the population largely represented in this comments section. Give up.
Glad to see there is still some sense of righteous and holy rather than sick and disgusting. Tired of idiots trying to be something that they NEVER will be why the government, corporations and medical establishments cater to the psychosis of a mental impairment that needs to be terminated permanently. Sick perverts is what the LGBTQ whatever are. Show me ONE PERSON who can go from being a man to a woman by using their mind and I will believe you or better yet a woman to a man. If you TRULY believe that a mental ability is all you need to "transgender" then you shouldn't NEED to have drugs or surgery to cater to what your sickness says you are.
Show me 1 couple who are man and man or woman and woman who have been able to CREATE A LIFE? Not that they had to go to the hospital or an adaption agency but after having their "consensual" perversion were able to get pregnant. This also means that the "women" did not go and get a sperm donors sperm but that one or the other produced the sperm themselves to get the other partner pregnant.
Show me that and I will believe you have a legitimate argument for equality. If not, then all you are is a sick perverted person who is a liar and a deceiver.
XX or XY is the ONLY OUT COMES. ANY THING ELSE IS A MUTATION OF THOSE GENES.
Shocking! Parents actually deciding what their children should learn in school! What is the world coming to!
"The depleted human residue you will leave behind has nothing worthwhile to offer you."
Otherwise known as your parents, the people that brought you into the world (chose not to abort them), fed them, educated them, and cared for them...
But yeah, Pride Month, that's the battle worth fighting...
Here's a tip, when the owner/publisher of your paper tells you not to do something, and you decide to do it anyway, expect the opportunity to find a new employer.
They did what they were told not to do, and they did it in a way that reflects badly on their school, and by extension the community.
The 'journalism student' that wrote the op-ed either never read the Florida bill they wrote about, or if they did read it, failed to understand what they read.
Journalism isn't regurgitating what MSNBC hosts say at night.
They embarrassed their community, and those that pay the bills pulled the plug.
Instead of manufactured outrage from both sides, post everything if it's not about physically harming people https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/laurence-fox-banned-from-twitter-sparks-outrage-for-posting-swastika-symbol-made-of-pride-flags-492465
After seeing globalist pride flags decorating a street in England, I was reminded of 1938 Berlin and those flags. The same street did not allow Christmas decorations.
call me crazy, but I'm beginning to think people only decry cancel culture when it's venues for sharing their viewpoint that get shutdown by gummint authority... a whole lot of rationalizing later and those same people get circle jerks going in comments sections about how awesome cancelling is... and the beat goes on...
If U.S. Supreme Court rulings - results arrived at through a very “conservative” constitutional due process is viewed as “woke”, then African-American and women’s right to vote would also be “woke”.
These two voting groups are the majority of American voters today and would be defined as “woke” using this measuring stick. I’m betting the school officials won’t call their wives and daughter’s rights as “woke” - rights obtained through that same constitutional due process - going against the majority of voters in 1920 in some states.
Public schools are “government-entities” and students/parents are “citizens”. So public school official’s authority is legally restrained by the First Amendment. School officials can’t infringe on citizen speech or association - it’s the law!
Given the woke cancellations and left totalitarianism on so many college campuses, I'm not going to fault the school for blocking this Trojan horse. Gender issues aren't "existential" -- they're ideological and divisive. And studies show that, among teens, they are transitory. Seems like the school dodged a bullet by nipping this crap in the bud.
Conservative Politicians: We don't want to censor anyone. We just don't want anyone to be able to force woke ideology on everyone else. We don't want to censor wokeness, we just don't want it shoved down people's throats.
People: That sounds reasonable, I guess we can give you some political power.
Conservative Politicians: POWER! Yes! Censor everything! Crush all dissent! BWAHAHAHA!
As you can tell by some of the responses here, many people think that free speech is only permitted if it's responsible free speech - and they get to decide what counts as "responsible".
Nobody's free speech rights are being infringed. The publishers of the student newspaper (the school) get to decide what speech is permitted within that publication. That is no more an infringement on free speech than the NYT deciding not to publish a Trump Jr. op ed is.
If students want to voice their opinions somewhere else, they are free to do so (though if they are underage, they need their parents' permission).
So underage students are "nobodies". Gottit.
I'm just stating two facts: (1) nobody has a right to use a school newspaper to voice their opinion, and (2) underage students are subject to restrictions placed on them by their legal guardians.
Now, if you want to lower the age of majority, we can talk about that. But unless kids are willing to take on the obligations of adulthood, they can't expect to have the rights and privileges of adulthood.
But unless kids are willing to take on the obligations of adulthood, they can't expect to have the rights and privileges of adulthood.
Is adulthood referenced in the Constitution as a requirement to have rights? I must have missed that bit.
First of all, the age of majority is a state matter, not a federal matter.
Second, while the BoR explicitly protects rights, it does so for "the people", not for "every citizen" or "every human"; it is a statement of a general principle, not a precise definition of a group of individuals.
First of all, the age of majority is a state matter, not a federal matter.
Not since 14A.
while the BoR explicitly protects rights, it does so for "the people"
That argument was lost well before Heller
No, it is still a state matter. Among other things, the age of majority is, in fact, different in different states.
The 14A didn't automatically incorporate the entire BoR into state constitutions; rather, incorporation has been a piecemeal process carried out by SCOTUS.
That's not an "argument", that's a simple fact.
It is also a simple fact that according to SCOTUS, "the people" refers to "members of the political community" of the US. This automatically excludes children.
This is a worthwhile discussion, but has nothing to do with this issue. The Student "journalists" do now own the paper, or the printing press. Their free speech rights are not infringed by the actual owner of the paper (taxpayers) refusing to pay for publication.
They have every right to write and publish ... at their own expense.
Shorter Ghatanathoah: "Don't say Trump".
Really? So the school forbid the students from publishing on the internet under the banner of their choosing. Did they prevent the students from self funding the publishing of their ideas?
No?
Then nothing was censored and no dissent was crushed.
Grow Up.
Good.
The student paper at my HS 40+ years ago was cliquish, strictly 'progressive' and composed of budding authoritarians. I found the same sorts at the Berkeley graduate school of journalism/activism at the beginning of the '90s. I don't imagine that they have changed much. I am not feeling very sympathetic to people that have long reveled in doing to others what is now being done to them.
Particularly when it is done at taxpayer expense.
If the kids had raised all the money for the publication instead of having it given to them, that would be educating. Getting an entertainment news or sports news journalism degree would be better than an activist news degree.
Getting a non-journalism degree altogether would be preferable. That way when they work as journalists they might actually know something about some of the subjects they're writing about.
^^THIS^^
He who owns the printing press determines what gets printed.
The students didn't own the printing press. (The school didn't either, but the school had the contract with the owner of the press.) If the students want to pony up the money to pay a printing press owner to get their issues printed, or if the owner of the printing press agrees to contribute newsprint, ink, and machinery time to publishing the students' issues, the paper will continue to get printed. But if not - those who wish to "publish" best not go out of their way to piss off the owner of or contractor for the printing press they want to access.
Or, could we possibly get a wise, all-knowing federal judge to examine the motives of all involved, find some to be pure and some to be impure, and order the owner of the printing press to print anything?
Counterspeech: it's a thing.
https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/940/counterspeech-doctrine
The concept of counterspeech is important when it comes to whether to make speech illegal.
Preventing students from publishing something in a school newspaper isn't making anybody's speech illegal.
Clearly, Nebraskans do not want their children groomed into pedophilia and child abuse by the sickos of the LGBTQRSTEDETBERD ......
The school does not technically have to publish the school newspaper. Has anyone heard of "desktop publishing"?
I know this is HARD for all you pretend libertarians to comprehend (yes, talking about YOU Shackford), but free speech does not mean you get to speak and someone else is obligated to pay for it.
The OWNER of the student newspaper (we call them taxpayers) exercised their free speech rights by stopping the newspaper from printing someone else's speech.
If the fragile little prima donnas who put stuff in the student newspaper that they had to know the taxpayers would not like want to publish that stuff they need to pay for their own publishing. THAT is free speech.