Disc jockeys should have been protected

Dear Editor,

I'm disappointed that student managers of WFSE and faculty advisers recommended the suspension (originally termination) of Andrew Miller and Aaron MacWhirter for their on-air parody of SGA President Kristen Zelechowski on April 2.

The United States Supreme Court in Hustler Magazine v Falwell (docket #: 86-1278) (1988) has made clear that the First Amendment protects satire and parody as free speech.

The court was wise in doing so. For centuries, satire and parody have defamiliarized ordinary language, its practitioners using wit to expose vice, corruption, folly, and injustice, with the intention of improving existing conditions.

Although satire and parody often offend their targets, the court has made clear that those satirized cannot sue for damages unless they can prove intentional malice.

In rendering its decision, the Supreme Court appropriately recognized that the benefit from the free exchange of ideas supercedes the potential emotional distress parody may inflict upon its targets.

Although Hosty v Carter (doc. # 05-377) (2006) has recently set precedent that school administrators have the right to exercise editorial control over student publications (the licensure of radio broadcasts is an even more complex issue regarding free speech), extreme measures of censorship are incongruous with the intentions of free speech clauses and should be limited only to the most egregious journalistic offenses.

In this case, Andrew and Aaron's actions seem well within the boundaries of accepted journalistic practice. First Amendment rights shouldn't end at the campus border, and both students should be reinstated to their positions immediately--though this late in the semester such an action would be merely symbolic.

Robert Hass