Resources

"CU leader wants Churchill fired" Colorado Springs Gazette, CO. May 29, 2007.
http://www.gazette.com/articles/churchill_22986___article.html/university_fired.html

"Gabfest already in Rosie’s rear ‘view’: Feuding O’Donnell makes an early exit" Boston Herald, MA. May 26, 2007.
http://thetrack.bostonherald.com/starTracks/view.bg?articleid=1003199

"CBS Fires Don Imus Over Racial Slur" CBS News.com. April 12, 2007.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/12/national/main2675273.shtml

Questions

1. What controversial comments were made in three separate situations by University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill, Rosie O’Donnell, and Don Imus?
   
   Churchill wrote an essay likening some victims in the World Trade Center to Adolf Eichmann, who helped carry out the Holocaust; O’Donnell said,“655,000 Iraqi civilians have died. Who are the terrorists?” These comments led to on-air arguments between O’Donnell and her co-hosts. Don Imus referred to the Rutger’s University women’s basketball team members as “nappy-headed hoes.”
   
   
2. What consequences has each individual faced as a result of their speech?
   
   
   • Ward Churchill: The University determined that Churchill could not be fired because his speech was protected by the First Amendment; however, an investigation into allegations that Churchill had falsified past research was begun. The University president has recommended Churchill be fired for this infraction.
     
   • Rosie O’Donnell asked for and received an early exit from her contract at ABC for her television show, The View.
     
   • Don Imus was fired by CBS.
     
     
3. How, if at all, does the First Amendment apply to each of these three situations?
   
   
   • The University of Colorado is a public school and is therefore an arm of government. The First Amendment limits the actions of government. Therefore, it could be argued that disciplining or firing an employee because of controversial statements is a First Amendment violation.
     
   • The First Amendment does not apply to the actions of ABC, a private company.
     
   • The First Amendment does not apply to the actions of CBS, a private company.
     
     
4. Did Ward Churchill have a First Amendment right to compare September 11 victims to a Nazi? Did Rosie O’Donnell have a right to liken US troops to terrorists? Did Don Imus have a right to use a racial slur?
   
   Given that they did not use obscenity or directly incite violence, all three people had a First Amendment right to engage in these types of speech.
   
   
5. How do the actions of ABC and CBS differ from government censorship?
   
   Government censorship is the silencing or limiting of viewpoints through the threat of punishment—jail or fines. All citizens are subject to the criminal justice system. A private company, on the other hand, cannot use force to silence viewpoints. It may, however, choose to fire someone if their speech is incompatible with the company’s values or image. That person is free to find work elsewhere.
   
   
6. Did the actions taken by the University of Colorado—a public school—violate the First Amendment?
   
   Some students will say no: The university determined Churchill’s speech, however offensive, was protected by the First Amendment. The president’s recommendation to fire Churchill came only after allegations of research misconduct.
   
   Others will say yes, that the allegations of misconduct simply gave the university a reason to fire Churchill without saying they were doing so as punishment for his speech.Therefore, the First Amendment has been violated.
   
   
7. It has been said that the “antidote” to bad speech is more speech. How can citizens in a free society respond to controversial statments?
   
   Citizens can respond to bad speech by working to make their own viewpoints heard in the “marketplace of ideas.” As happened in these three situations, citizens can write letters to companies, send emails to television sponsors, publish letters to the editors, organize boycotts or find other ways of expressing a message that will convince others of their point of view.

Extensions

1. Discuss the concept of the “Marketplace of Ideas” with students, and try to arrive at a consensus as how to best define the term. Questions for discussion:
   
   • Freedom of speech means we might sometimes be offended by what others say. Do we have a right not to be offended?
     
     
2. Should there be laws against using offensive terms? Who would determine what is offensive? Would such laws be compatible with the principles of the First Amendment?