For the past decade or so, college administrators have taken it upon themselves to enforce various
speechcodes and otherwise trample on the rights of anyone who happens to be on campus. However, recently colleges have started expanding they're meddling to other areas. In a gesture of staggering smugness and self-righteousness, college administrators have appointed themselves guardians of the internet. More specifically, they're guardians of
MySpace and
facebook. Many college administrators now look through these sites for anything that can use against their students (examples of this
here,
here,
here, and finally
here). A great deal of the things colleges look for on these sites are various alcohol and drug violations. While I believe it's at best unethical and at worst illegal to troll for those violations, the problem I am more concerned with is trolling for speechcode violations.
In one of the examples I linked above, a student was charged with a speechcode violation for intimating that they wanted to "crucify and then burn at the stake" a particular residential advisor. This statement is a clear case of constitutionally protected hyperbole. Saying you'd like to do something does not constitute a threat, and the chances of something actually intending to both crucify some AND burn them at the stake are rather low. The fact that college administrators would take something that is clearly a joke and use to endager someone's academic career (and consequently whole life) shows how far down college administrations have fallen.
Another example involves a group of students creating a facebook club that labeled another student as a "jerk." While this appears completely harmless to many (if not most), the student in question was able to charge those in the club with harassment. The number of things wrong with this are mind boggling. One big one is simply the question of jurisdiction. Do college administrators have control over what their students say and do outside of school? Keep in mind these students are adults and thus entitled to complete protections under our Constitution. I would say that it takes an enormous amount of hubris for an administrator to think that they can (or even should) control the lives of their students.
The second big problem with this case is the complete misunderstanding of what harassment means. Calling someone a jerk is not harassment. Making a joke at somebody elses expense is not harassment. True harassment must be a pattern of behavior that is both severe and unavoidable. Whether or not something is severe is based on what a "reasonable person" would think. Certainly a reasonable person does not consider being called a "jerk" very severe. I know I've been called a lot worse, as I'm sure most of you have. The second question is whether or not it is unavoidable. I maintain that nothing that is posted on the internet is unavoidable. If you want to avoid it, simply don't go to the website in question. It's the easiest solution in the world. To argue that something that's posted on the internet where a person would have to go out of their to find it can constitute harassment is absurb. As far as college goes, harassment seems to mean whatever the administration wants it to mean.
Colleges, once bastions of free inquiry, have gotten to the point where even student speech on the internet isn't safe from the speechcode gestapo. And they're only getting worse. It's only in these past few months that colleges have really gotten onboard patrolling myspace and facebook. In the ensuing years this practice will be much more prevalent. We're lucky we have organizations like
FIRE trying to push back the tide of censorship. Colleges have become the very antithesis of freedom and for that they should be ashamed.