Free Speech Wall
Logan Chesson ⧫ Marla Means ⧫ Amanda Perri ⧫ Melody Wilhelm
LIS Action Research Project
Privacy, Power, Privilege, and Protection:
Erecting and Maintaining a Free Speech Wall at UNCG
(note: the project was theoretical and the links, aside from the code of conduct, are not functional)
I. Purpose:
In the provision of a thorough education, the right to free speech and free expression are crucial and must be recognized as such. To this end, under the administration of the UNCG Library and Information Sciences (LIS) Department, a Free Speech Wall (the Wall) will be established which will provide students and members of the UNCG community a place to freely and safely express themselves, with respect to the standards and expectations previously established in the UNCG Student Code of Conduct (the Code).
II. Scope:
The Wall is intended for use by UNCG and those visiting campus, and the policies herein shall apply to all whom so choose to utilize the Wall.
III. Policy:
It is the right of all people to be able to freely express themselves, but within the confines of UNCG, certain standards of behavior must be recognized. Thus the policies laid forth herein shall seek to balance the freedom of expression with the expectations of respect and responsibility laid forth by the Code.
IV. What is and is not Protected:
Any opinion or item, no matter how disagreeable, is allowed and protected as part of the right to free speech. Individuals are encouraged to act responsibly and with respect when posting items to the Wall.
V. The Wall:
The Wall shall be established at a location deemed appropriate by the LIS Department. It shall consist of one electronic wall with an electronic keyboard and smart pens that will only write on the Wall so as to allow individuals to post items to the Wall in accordance with the established policies.
VI. Administration and Oversight:
The Wall shall be overseen by a member of the faculty appointed by the LIS Department and shall serve in conjunction with a Graduate Assistant (GA) selected by the LIS Department. It shall be the duty of this faculty member to serve as the administrator of the Wall, monitoring it for any violations of the policies laid out herein, answering questions, hearing any submitted concerns and suggestions, reviewing reported posts, removing content as needed, and ensuring that the Wall itself is well-maintained. The faculty member may delegate any task to the GA other than hearing and responding to concerns, suggestions, and reports and removing content from the Wall. When content is removed by administrative action, the Administrator must append a brief explanation of their decision.
VII. Regulations:
The Wall shall employ a self-regulating system wherein posts that are made may be voted up or down by users, as well as commented on. Voting or commenting on a post impacts its visibility and the time it remains on the wall’s main page. The more a post is voted up, the longer it will remain on the main page of the wall and the more prominent it will be. The more a post is voted down, the less time it will remain on the main page and the less prominent it will be. If a post receives one hundred (100) down votes it will automatically be referred to the administrator for review. If a post receives one thousand (1,000) it will be temporarily hidden from the main page and referred to the administrator, who will either restore or remove it in accordance with the established policy.
VIII: Reporting Posts:
A third button on each comment shall allow for posts to be reported to the Administrator in regard to concerns over content. Anonymous comments may be sent with this report to explain the individual’s concerns. This action will not remove the post but will refer it to the Administrator to be reviewed.
IX. Concerns and Suggestions:
Students are encouraged to express any concerns or suggestions they may have to the Administrator of the Wall. Concerns may be sent anonymously through the Wall’s suggestions and concerns box feature or emailed directly to the Administrator email account ([email protected]).
X. The Archive:
All posts to the wall, including posts that were removed, will be archived for posterity. The information archived will include the contents of the post itself, the day it was posted, the number of up and down votes it received, the length of time it remained on the main page, administrative justifications for removal if it was removed, and links to any comments made on the original post. These archives may be accessed through the Jackson Library Digital Archives.
XI. Revisions, Amendments, and Interpretation:
The policy established herein shall be reviewed annually by the LIS Department, with any revisions or amendments to the policy being established by majority vote of the LIS Department faculty. Questions or suggestions regarding policy or the interpretation thereof shall be referred to the Administrator.
XII. Disclaimer:
The views, beliefs, and opinions expressed on the Wall do not in any way reflect the views, beliefs, and opinions of UNCG, the LIS Department, or the appointed Administrator and GA.
XIII. Further Information:
Further information, including contact information, may be found at http://lis.uncg.edu/thewall.
XIV. References:
This policy shares the policies previously established and laid out in the UNCG Code of Conduct. A digital copy may be found at the following address: http://sa.uncg.edu/handbook/student-code-of-conduct/
Furthermore, the policies established herein are built upon those previously established by the United States Constitution in the First Amendment, which establishes the basic rights of freedom of religion, speech, press, and assembly, and the precedents established by the following cases:
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
- This case defined the constitutional rights of students. There is a test that is still used today, called the Tinker test, which determines whether or not students’ rights have been violated by a school’s disciplinary actions.
Cohen v. California (1971)
- In this case, it was determined that it is unlawful for states to censor their citizens in the name of creating a more civil society; it also determined that politics are a very emotional subject and therefore, vulgarity can sometimes be a tolerable if not entirely desirable side effect.
Morse v. Frederick (2007)
- It was decided in this case that in a school-sponsored event, the school administration is allowed to suppress speech that promotes illegal drug use or other illegal activities.