Student media serves as an open forum for students, faculty and staff to share information, concerns, and debate topics that directly affect our campus community and world. What makes this form of media different from others, is its proximity. We as a campus community see each other all the time which can make some opinions feel… personal.
But when we try to silence these opinions, we slowly chip away at the very mission of student media. Open dialogue.
There is plenty of inflammatory and divisive media out in the world and it can be very difficult to identify if what we’re consuming is uncomfortable or harmful. Harm is when free speech is used to purposefully deceive or attack and incite violence or division. Discomfort, alternatively, is a reaction that occurs when our own personal ideas, values, and morals are questioned.
The Maroon published an opinion piece recently by Anistin Murray titled “AmericaFest & building TPUSA on campus”. Like many in our Loyola community, I was outraged. I found the piece to be violently tone deaf, full of privilege, and lacking any meaningful understanding or research on the organization it was attempting to praise.
Those are my feelings. My opinions and criticisms. I should without a doubt have the right to express and discuss them… just as Murray has the right to publish her piece.
I am in no way endorsing Murray’ piece. I use it as an example of what happens when we try to erase something rather than critically respond. The way we respond to controversial pieces matters just as much as the pieces themselves. Free speech does not equal freedom from scrutiny. It means understanding that ideas will be challenged, analyzed, and in some cases knocked down. It seems simple, however, the way we choose to navigate these points is extremely important.
When we disagree, we often reach for harmful language instead of constructive criticism. It feels easier to immediately label something as harmful, instead of taking a deeper look and calling out its flaws. If we avoid thoughtful engagement, especially here on a college campus, we drive ideas underground where we can’t see them, never allowing them to be challenged.
This is why I emphasize student media. This argument has a lot of nuance and that nuance is substantial. I am not saying we should allow hate speech and harmful rhetoric on campus with zero editorial judgment, rather that as a university paper, The Maroon has a responsibility to allow all students (including YOU) to share your thoughts, ideas, and feelings, even ones that may be controversial.
Think of it as a kind of boot camp for the future journalists, writers, editors, and publishers of the world. Your opinions and comments on what we do directly impacts how us, the next generation of media professionals will navigate the industry. The way you interact with and respond to our content matters and the way you respond to each other does as well.
If we replace engagement on our campus with erasure, we lose the opportunity to sharpen our own reasoning and critical thinking. College should be a place where we as students hone the skills necessary to respond thoughtfully to ideas we don’t agree with.
My fear for Loyola isn’t division, it’s complete and total disengagement. Picking sides doesn’t make you safe, it makes you complicit. When you see something you disagree with, respond to it. Don’t dismiss it, and don’t erase it. Argue against it, harshly critique it, but don’t attempt to make it disappear as if it was never there.
What are we really doing by attempting to silence speech?
