Student Government addresses advertising ban
Letter to the editor
Recently, the administration of the University of Notre Dame has come to the conclusion that the Gay and Lesbian Alumni of Notre Dame and Saint Mary's (GALA) should not be allowed to advertise in The Observer. The University offers two explanations for this action.
First, the administration claims that the primary beneficiary of advertisements by GALA is OutreachND, formerly known as GLND/SMC, a student organization which was denied recognition by Notre Dame two years ago.
Second, the administration suggests that GALA's beliefs are not consistent with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church. On the surface, these justifications seem plausible.
However, upon examination of the position by the University, many serious flaws are found. First, the bedrock of any media entity is the ability for that particular organization to define and set its own limits concerning the message it will communicate to its audience. The policy set by the administration denies the ability of The Observer to make its own judgments in regards to the content of its newspaper. The administration counters this argument with its claim of publishing rights. Yet, the administration only holds a 15 percent stake in The Observer. This holding hardly constitutes a fiscally-based controlling ownership of The Observer. The exercise of the University's so-called "publishing rights" therefore seems to be an unwarranted action taken by the University on behalf of The Observer. Furthermore, it is a blatant example of censorship.
The second issue raised by the University's position concerns the nature of academic freedom on this campus. A university setting dictates free thought and exploration of many diverse and challenging issues. It does not, however, dictate an environment of censorship and limited opinion.
The action taken by Notre Dame suggests a vendetta by the University against any and all opinion which is contrary to the nature of its position. Consequently, this conduct severely impedes the ability of students to exercise their rights of academic freedom.
For example, The Observer provides a knowledge of the day-in and day-out tasks and pressures of a full-fledged newspaper. With that responsibility, the students involved should have the right to deem which advertisements will be used and how the advertisements will affect their audience. The University's action raises the question of whether or not the University trusts its student body to differentiate between the moral teachings of the Catholic Church and secular beliefs. The University's denial of advertisements by GALA clearly illustrates that the University does not.
The final concern caused by the University's action focuses on the definition of moral teachings of the Catholic Church. The University claims that GALA does not follow the moral teachings of the Catholic Church. However, the letter to The Observer from Father Malloy's Office, as cited in the Aug. 27, 1999 edition, states only that there is implied opposition to Catholic teachings by GALA. The word "implied" bears significance because it suggests that the University does not specifically know what GALA's positions are. This realization suggests that if Notre Dame has failed to take adequate measures to investigate the position of GALA, then the University seems to have made a decision in great haste without all of the important facts. This apparent negligence by Notre Dame hardly gives it the right to deem whether or not GALA is opposed to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
The University of Notre Dame's decision to bar advertisements in The Observer illustrates a poor decision on behalf of the administration. The administration has failed to fully take into account issues of censorship, academic freedom and the beliefs of GALA as an organization.
Subsequently, the University must change its position and allow readers to make informed decisions based upon all the pertinent facts with relation to a potential advertising entity. Without taking this action, a serious precedent is set which questions the very basis of the right of the media to communicate the message it deems appropriate to its audience.
Matthew Mamak
Chief of Staff
Office of the Undergraduate Student Body President
Michael Fierro
Executive Coordinator of Multicultural Affairs
Office of the Undergraduate Student Body President
Jay M. Smith
Executive Coordinator of Public Relations
Office of the Undergraduate Student Body President
September 16, 1999
All Viewpoint Stories for Friday, September 17, 1999
