Did you all hear about the Provost's office directing the removal of a flier from the "Student Orientation Edition" of the _Technician_? They apparently didn't like the picture of the "Shamrock Streakers." The picture was funny; it wasn't offensive.

I thought that it was yet another knee-jerk reaction by top NC State officials.

7/11/2006 2:48:36 PM

CONSPIRACY!

7/11/2006 2:49:57 PM

i say we put up fliers around campus with pics of Dr Stafford that say "this man has no dick"

7/11/2006 2:50:42 PM

Quote :

"the _Technician_?"

wtf?

7/11/2006 3:02:12 PM

The title of a newspaper should be underlined or italicized. In an electronic environment, underscores before and after the title can be used to indicate the underlining.

Does that answer your question, smcrawff?

7/11/2006 3:18:19 PM

we have the underline tag btw

7/11/2006 3:19:27 PM

I've noticed that clearly indicated by the underscore device, and I may use it in the future. But my way is not incorrect and it is just as fast. So. . . .

7/11/2006 3:25:43 PM

haha yeah it should be underlined, but there's no "the" in front

I agree though, I thought the flyer removal was absurd. Apparently students have gotten a little too self-confident with their freedoms on this campus

Just seems a peculiar decision considering it ran on the front-page on March 18 w/o an issue, not to mention the fact the Administration had 2 weeks to have it pulled... ::shrug::

For more info:

Technician: Administration removes fliers from Orientation packets
http://tinyurl.com/gdxp3

Technician: Censorship harms University image
http://tinyurl.com/h5z98

News & Observer: Student flier with fannies won't fly
http://www.newsobserver.com/662/story/458270.html

Quote :

"Administration removes fliers from Orientation packets Provost Larry Nielsen makes the decision to remove "inappropriate" fliers from Orientation packets Josh Harrell Issue date: 7/6/06 Section: News Late Wednesday afternoon, Provost Larry Nielsen informed Orientation workers that a decision had been made to remove Student Media fliers from the Orientation packets set to be distributed starting Thursday due to an "inappropriate" photo. "I asked to have them taken out because it was inappropriate for Orientation," Nielsen said. Nielsen said the decision was made around 3:30, and he informed Orientation representatives immediately after. Technician Editor in Chief Tyler Dukes said one of the things he was most upset about was the timing of the situation. "We turned the fliers in by deadline according to the guidelines," Dukes said. "They had two weeks to figure out if the material was good to go and now there is nothing Student Media can do before orientees get the packets." The guidelines, given out by Gabe Wical, the assistant director of Orientation, give the sizes fliers need to be, the number needed and the time on which they must be delivered to Orientation representatives. Student Media spent $2000 on the production of the fliers, according to Dukes, who said the Orientation representatives should be more clear on restrictions. "We're trying to get people interested in joining Student Media and there's no way we can do anything before the first group of new students come in," Dukes said. "They don't think it's the image Student Media wants to send out. But, in my point of view, it's not their job to make those decisions." According to Nielsen, "Anybody looking at [the flier] would see why it was inappropriate." The image portrays Technician Copy Desk Chief Megan Riley being surrounded by streakers on St. Patrick's Day. Riley was doing a story on the streakers. "It's a great and accurate representation of the things you'll see in college," Dukes said. "College is about a lot more than people think, and people learn that quickly. I still see things I never imagined I'd see when I walk around campus." According to Dukes, Student Media sought legal advice from the Student Press Law Center, a group created for student journalists. "We want to make sure the fliers are placed back in the bag or we are refunded the money," Dukes said. "I feel we were mistreated and feel we shouldn't have to pay $2000 and not be refunded. So we're pursuing that avenue.""

7/11/2006 3:31:49 PM

I don't think the picture was "funny."

Free speech, do whatever you want, blah, blah, blah...I could care less what they print.

But just know that the picture is NOT funny. It may be funny to the few people involved, but as an outside observer, all I see are potential assault charges.

And I'm not overreacting.

7/11/2006 3:51:56 PM

STICK UP DA ASS

7/11/2006 3:53:04 PM

Everybody needs to speak out about this. Top officials at the University have done one thing after another to alienate Student Media, Student Government, and so on.

We really should take a stand on these issues. Power to the people!

By the way, I did NOT include "the" as part of the title of the _Technician_, so it's not incorrect.

7/11/2006 3:57:10 PM

^Take a stand for free speech, but don't tell people it's funny. That's subjective, and you know it.

7/11/2006 4:00:03 PM

Don't you think you’re being a bit prudish, BridgetSPK? I mean, I don't know the girl in the picture, but it doesn't look like she's running away in horror.

And it is college, after all, where fun and spontaneity should be celebrated. If you can't have some fun while you’re in college, when the hell can you have it?

7/11/2006 4:06:09 PM

bridget, slightly better than bethaleigh since 2003 (hey that rhymes).

7/11/2006 4:07:01 PM

Quote :

"Don't you think you’re being a bit prudish, BridgetSPK? I mean, I don't know the girl in the picture, but it doesn't look like she's running away in horror."

Aha, that attitude is classic.

I'll reiterate:

They shouldn't say, "They should print it because it's funny, not offensive."

They should say, "We know it might offend some folks. We don't care. Free speech, bitch."

Don't pussy out and whine about being funny.

7/11/2006 4:14:16 PM

So, now I can't tell people that I think something is funny? My thread, my opinion, what's wrong with that?

You, of course, are free to disagree, as you have done. You don't have to think the photo is funny, but your general position ("all I see are potential assault charges") is playing right into the hands of an already overbearing administration--and an already overly litigious society, for that matter.

By the way, I think free speech is more important than just a "blah, blah, blah" stance, as you posted. Shouldn't you?

7/11/2006 4:14:36 PM

Of course I think it's important. Are you reading what I write?

I think it's offensive, and I think it should have been printed.

7/11/2006 4:16:01 PM

Quote :

"But my way is not incorrect and it is just as fast. So. . . ."

it is incorrect. you should be using italics (like you mentioned could be used) - never underlines for newspapers, book titles, movies, etc. Underlining is for typewriters. Italics is for computers.

7/11/2006 4:23:21 PM

Italics can be used for printers--old and new. One certainly can use italics in an ELECTRONIC ENVIRONMENT and it is correct, but underscores are allowed, too.

I don't have the authorities in front of me, but _The Everyday Writer_, which is a college-level textbook, and probably MLA documentation allow this use. I'll get back to you later with my sources--but I'm certain of the former.

7/11/2006 4:36:47 PM

Yeah, we better get to the bottom of this. We can't communicate otherwise!!!

7/11/2006 4:40:38 PM

i'm with bridget on this - who the fuck cares - you are just trying to be different b/c you can - we get it

7/11/2006 4:45:24 PM

well i'm not about to get into an argument with a guy who thinks this is rock-solid rational thinking -

Quote :

"For Christ's sake, people, I'm comparing the MURDERS in about a handful of US cities in ONE YEAR (2002) to deaths due to combat in the WAR ZONE of a WHOLE COUNTRY over more than a THREE-YEAR PERIOD (2003-2006)! The US cities lose, because their NUMBER of deaths is higher. If you cannot grasp the self-evident point, then I cannot wrap your mind around it for you."

http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=410658

7/11/2006 4:49:13 PM

I agree with Bridget.

that picture isnt funny.

unless you think allusions to gang rape is funny.

i guess if youre a drunk 19 year old, then yeah, that shit's hilarious.

but the provost knows it isnt drunk 19 year olds who pay tuition and donate to the alumni foundation.

7/11/2006 4:59:00 PM

Quote :

"hooksaw: Did you all hear about the Provost's office directing the removal of a flier from the "Student Orientation Edition" of the _Technician_?"

Quote :

"hooksaw: By the way, I did NOT include "the" as part of the title of the _Technician_, so it's not incorrect."

self-pwnt x 2

but enough semantics, back to the point...

---

Quote :

"joe_schmoe: unless you think allusions to gang rape is funny."

Quote :

"BridgetSPK: But just know that the picture is NOT funny. It may be funny to the few people involved, but as an outside observer, all I see are potential assault charges. And I'm not overreacting."

How so?

The girl in the picture is the reporter for the story -- she was the one interviewing them. The picture was staged. And she's pretty clearly laughing her ass off.

How does that give anyone allusions to assault or gang-rape??? I'm lost... 

7/11/2006 5:32:11 PM

Quote :

"self-pwnt x 2 but enough semantics, back to the point..."

pretty sure he meant that he didn't put _The Technician_

i'm not sure how you didn't understand that

7/11/2006 5:50:25 PM

You've got to consider it from an image standpoint. This university has been working hard to shed its traditional stigma as a sausage fest. Then you go and publish a photo of naked guys caressing each other while mobbing the only girl in sight.

[Edited on July 11, 2006 at 5:58 PM. Reason : Oh, and the technician doesn't deserve to be underlined. It doesn't even deserve capitalization.]

7/11/2006 5:57:22 PM

^^
a 'the' is a 'the'

the Technician is wrong

The Technician is wrong

Technician is not wrong (Pyro's point notwithstanding )

I'm not sure how you didn't understand that

---

Quote :

"Pyro: You've got to consider it from an image standpoint. This university has been working hard to shed its traditional stigma as a sausage fest. Then you go and publish a photo of naked guys caressing each other while mobbing the only girl in sight."

oh I understand the argument, and I even agree with it to some extent -- but waiting until 4:30pm the day before they're going out, when the Administration had two weeks to look it over? that just seems like it was done maliciously, not out of concern for the University's image

and that's not even getting into the fact it was/is illegal censorship. I just wish the paper had the balls to file suit over it... 

7/11/2006 6:00:23 PM

Quote :

"she's pretty clearly laughing her ass off"

no, its not clear. its only clear if you knew the context of the picture.

Quote :

"You've got to consider it from an image standpoint."

exactly. Duke Lacrosse anyone?

7/11/2006 6:09:09 PM

I was just joking. I kinda doubt the university cares if we get laid.

But yea, waiting until the last minute is always a bad idea. Unless you're firing someone. Or making a decision you know they will hate...oh, wait.

7/11/2006 6:09:34 PM

Quote :

"joe_schmoe: no, its not clear. its only clear if you knew the context of the picture."

Like, say, from the caption underneath the picture maybe?...

7/11/2006 6:13:18 PM

i'm really bored otherwise this is just too stupid to argue about

1
Did you all hear about the Provost's office directing the removal of a flier from the "Student Orientation Edition" of the Technician?

2
Did you all hear about the Provost's office directing the removal of a flier from the "Student Orientation Edition" of Technician?

3
Did you all hear about the Provost's office directing the removal of a flier from the "Student Orientation Edition" of newspaper?

you really think that the word "the" shouldn't have been there? what grammar rule does that follow?

[Edited on July 11, 2006 at 6:15 PM. Reason : .]

7/11/2006 6:15:25 PM

Are you all being serious when you say the picture looks like assault?

7/11/2006 6:15:56 PM

Quote :

"OmarBadu: this is just too stupid to argue about"

Agreed. So I'll just save us both time and go "omg OmarBadu you win, gg"


back to the allusions of assault and gang rape...  

7/11/2006 6:22:56 PM

Quote :

"TGD: How so? The girl in the picture is the reporter for the story -- she was the one interviewing them. The picture was staged. And she's pretty clearly laughing her ass off. How does that give anyone allusions to assault or gang-rape??? I'm lost... "

It looks like an assault, and when I said that, I described myself as an outside observer.

Now, when I use the word "assault," I'm speaking in legal terms, not what we commonly consider an assault. If one co-worker grabbing another on the ass qualifies as sexual assault, I think what appears to be going on in that picture qualifies too. It appears to be six people in thongs surrounding and accosting another person.

The picture is staged, and the girl thinks it's funny. That doesn't make it look any better.

As far as the girl "clearly laughing her ass off," I guess she thinks it's funny too. However, again as an outside observer, I know I've been in situations where I've laughed because I was uncomfortable, nervous, and didn't know how to handle a situation without making a scene. (I'm a scene-maker. LOL)

Quote :

"TGD: Like, say, from the caption underneath the picture maybe?..."

I'm trying to imagine what caption they would put with that picture. Anybody know what it says? I feel like I've read it, but now I'm not sure.

7/11/2006 6:56:43 PM

Oh, and as far as the administration waiting so long to pull it goes...they're either lazy or really busy. I can totally see them not bothering to look at it until the last minute.

(And does anybody think the people who designed those fliers knew that this would cause controversy? Shit, shake things up. Right on.)

7/11/2006 6:59:55 PM

Quote :

"but the provost knows it isnt drunk 19 year olds who pay tuition and donate to the alumni foundation."

DING..DING..DING...we have a winner!

I'm assuming they pulled it because it was in an orientation packet. Actually, I'm not assuming.

Quote :

""I asked to have them taken out because it was inappropriate for Orientation," Nielsen said."

A lot of parents will be reading those things. This is not the type of thing they want parents to think goes on around here on a regular basis.

7/11/2006 7:29:54 PM

Newsflash: Most parents also went to college and the tame antics at this widely student unfriendly university are likely nothing compared to the era many of them were in school.

7/11/2006 7:32:58 PM

^ thats a big damn set of assumptions.

and btw, NCSU has a large number of 1st generation college attendees. its an important demographic that colleges track as it = increased state and federal monies.



[Edited on July 11, 2006 at 8:04 PM. Reason : ]

7/11/2006 7:50:45 PM

Quote :

"BridgetSPK: (And does anybody think the people who designed those fliers knew that this would cause controversy? Shit, shake things up. Right on.)"

Why would they? It ran on the front page after it happened and there wasn't a peep. You didn't see the Provost pulling newspapers from bins or anything, or any demand of some kind of "decency review" in the future...

---

Quote :

"loudRyan: DING..DING..DING...we have a winner! I'm assuming they pulled it because it was in an orientation packet. Actually, I'm not assuming."

so breaking the law as ok, as long as the University's brings in more $texas?

I need to put you in touch with President Bush, he could learn a lot from you...

---

Quote :

"joe_schmoe: and btw, NCSU has a large number of 1st generation college attendees. its an important demographic that colleges track as it = increased state and federal monies."

"Remember folks, the important thing here is to shelter all of these 1st generation college attendees. Maybe if we don't let them see the pictures of what happens on a college campus, they'll never actually notice when it actually happens on a college campus."

---

Let's also applaud the University for their implicit endorsement of the remaining 60+ pieces of paper in the Orientation packets. I mean if this is "indecent" surely the rest were just fine. Here's hoping BGLA has a flyer of two men making out in the next packet... 

7/11/2006 8:06:10 PM

Quote :

"TGD: Why would they? It ran on the front page after it happened and there wasn't a peep. You didn't see the Provost pulling newspapers from bins or anything, or any demand of some kind of "decency review" in the future..."

Because controversy is fun! This gives them something to write about.

[Edited on July 11, 2006 at 8:17 PM. Reason : sss]

7/11/2006 8:15:51 PM

^
I get that, but what i'm saying is why would they think it would cause controversy in the first place? The full-page picture didn't generate any -- this is 1 tiny picture in a collage of 5, on a flyer encouraging people to join Student Media

7/11/2006 8:18:47 PM

i understand the notion that people don't wanna see a bunch of dude's butts outta the blue...but i think it would have been better if someone had said something about it before it was time to stuff packets

7/11/2006 9:14:27 PM

^^How could they not know it would cause controversy, considering it was for Orientation?

7/11/2006 9:33:40 PM

to be honest, they probably didn't think it would do anything controversial... a couple of dude's butts...tee hee

7/11/2006 9:38:45 PM

Quote :

"BridgetSPK: ^^How could they not know it would cause controversy, considering it was for Orientation?"

Because no one said anything about it when it ran on the front page of the paper back in March

You've got ~30,000 students here, plus who knows how many additional faculty and staff. A good chunk of them read Technician (particularly the senior Administrators and Board of Trustees, who catch flak if alumni find anything offensive). And as last year's assorted controversies illustrated, like the 'sorostitutes' issue, any sizeable subset of all those eyeballs will take offense at some of the smallest things ever printed.

So with all those eyes looking at a front-page story of guys in thongs back in March, no one (including the Provost) says anything -- so why would the newspaper staff think a 1) smaller picture 2) mixed in with a bunch of other pictures 3) in a recruitment flyer 4) mixed in with a bunch of other flyers would be any different? 

7/11/2006 9:59:07 PM

heck, i've gotten letters of negativity when i run cartoons of mr wuf fighting the fsu seminole

i've been told by some that i should not draw such things

7/11/2006 10:02:54 PM

yeah, but we all know what a racist pig you are, marko

7/11/2006 10:04:59 PM

It was very disrespectful, the way you had that feather falling on the ground.

7/11/2006 10:05:34 PM

what can i say

if it was the florida state cracker killers, i'd draw whatever mascot they had, too

7/11/2006 10:12:08 PM

ART IMITATES LIFE

7/11/2006 10:17:34 PM