Freedom of Speech is not a license to discriminate

by Petra Molina-dailyemerald

Freedom of Speech is one of America’s most beloved fundamental rights. It is essential to guarantee a democratic and free country. However, the concept of freedom has often been misconstrued to promote discrimination and infringe the rights of others.

On March 3rd, UO President Schill sent out a letter to students regarding a cartoon published by the Student Insurgent, a radical student-run newspaper on campus. He claimed the cartoon, regardless of the message it tried to convey, depicted racial stereotypes and gun violence. The cartoon, which showed two Black men holding guns behind their backs and telling a room to “trust” them, was taken down on March 10th.

“Anyone who knows me also knows that I believe deeply in the right of members of our community to express themselves, regardless of whether I agree with what they say.  That is true in this instance as well.  However, just because someone has the legal right to do something doesn’t mean that it is morally correct.  In this case, the depiction of gun violence was repulsive and, in this era of mass shootings, irresponsible.” Schill wrote.

In a statement made by the Student Insurgent on their Instagram, the newspaper clarified that the cartoon sought to express the author’s dislike of the decision made by ASUO to transfer the EMU to administrative control. Although the main objective of the cartoon was not to promote discrimination, it still contained stereotypes and misconceptions of race. The anonymous artist, who emphasized that they are a Black person themself, admitted to unintentionally enabling racism, anti-blackness and oppression. They apologized publicly and explained that the artwork did not intend to convey that message. However, they maintained their posture against UO’s administration’s decision.

When an image or article is published, it contains a message that the reader decodes. This message has the power to shape and transform people’s opinions and ideas. As part of the news industry, it is our responsibility to consider whether or not we are promoting our own internalized biases. It is essential to review how every piece published can affect marginalized communities. At the end of the day, we are all products of a society that favors the White majority. Since there is little representation of minority groups in Oregon, it is vital to make any representation that does exist accurate.

As a person of color, I understand that it can be hard to be expected to represent an entire community with your actions. However, people of color also understand how hurtful it is for our voices to be eliminated and manipulated in a newsroom and the media. In a role where your work is constantly published, the burden of representation is bound to be heavier. If you are not familiar with the term ‘burden of representation’, it essentially means that, for any marginalized group, the pressure on the individual to represent the whole is greater.

That is also why it is so important to have diversity in a newsroom. In an interview with the Insurgent editor, they mentioned, “We do have people of color within the organization, but they are not heavily involved in the editing process.” When there are more diverse perspectives in a newsroom, people can recognize biases within their desks and stop them from being published. 

The ban on discrimination is the heart of our human rights as well, and we cannot forget that.