Hopper 1

Jackson Hopper

ENG-111 Z93 2020SP

Professor Frink

May 4, 2020

As time passes, a country’s values and morals inevitably shift along with other

aspects of that country. This is because of the simple fact that the longer an institution

— in this case a country— has been around, the more it has been tested. Take a house

for example; In order to remain functional, a house must be constantly repaired,

modified, and in some cases completely rebuilt. The same is true for government;

notably the first amendment. While the amendment has not been directly changed,

numerous court rulings have modified what does and does not fit under the heading of

“free speech.” These exceptions to free speech include incitement, commercial

speech, obscenity and others. In the case of profanity at college sporting events, there

is no legal exception excluding it from protection under the first amendment. Even with

this fact, there are still colleges who want to take the right away during sporting events.

The effects of censoring college sporting events include dissatisfaction from students,

the future expansion of enacted censorship policies, and the decline of fan

participation in school sporting events.

The first effect of suppressing free speech during sporting events on college

campuses would be student dissatisfaction and overall unhappiness in regards to their

school environment. When a fundamental right such as free speech is encroached

upon, it is undoubtedly going to be met with dissatisfaction. The premise of censoring

 Hopper 2

language during sporting events comes from good intentions; although it is this same

premise that would cause uproar within the student population. The idea of not being

able to say whatever comes to mind is frightening to many people, which is why it

would be met with such dissatisfaction. This fear does not necessarily come directly

from the censorship of profanity during sporting games, but mostly from concept that

censorship can easily be expanded.

When a line of such as free speech is crossed, it is very easy to cross further

and further into this line. That is to say when a list of words or images are barred, it is

very easy for this list to be expanded. With a concept like free speech the only

concrete boundary is free speech itself, everything else is subjective. When one word is

declared off-limits simply because a person or group finds it offensive, that same

argument could then be made for an astounding number of other words. Banning a

certain number of words opens the symbolic flood gates to then begin banning

phrases, ideas, and eventually anything a person declares offensive. This may seem

exaggerated, but this is exactly the kind of descent seen in China. China initially began

by censoring small foreign websites almost immediately after the internet became

readily accessible; this was the first step towards full censorship equivalent to initially

crossing the line. Then, after protests in Tibet in 2008, China censored all of Youtube in

order to hide the idea of protesting from its people. China then began censoring more

and more websites including Facebook and Twitter in 2009 (Denyer). This kind of slope

is exactly what could happen on college campuses if the line of free speech is crossed,

 Hopper 3

although maybe not to this extent.

The final effect of sporting event language censorship would be a decline in

school pride and decreased fan involvement in school sporting events. A staple of

college life is involvement in sporting events. At these events students actively show

pride in their school by cheering, chanting, and showing overall excitement for their

teams. Changing the fan’s experience by dictating what they are and are not allowed to

say makes them feel almost betrayed by their own school who they were once so

proud of. In doing this, the school is actively discouraging fans from supporting their

team in the most extreme way they know how. Taking away this away would directly

result in less school spirit shown by fans.

By nature, free speech is not a complicated concept. It is only when two people

have differing ideas that a problem occurs. The problem of censorship during college

sporting events is simply this: two groups with differing ideas. At the core of the issue,

one group wants to prohibit what the other is allowed to say. This begs the question, is

the first amendment designed to be shifted to only represent the views of those in

power? Why should students at a private college have any fewer rights than those in a

public school? It is questions expressing dissenting opinions like these that

demonstrate the true value and purpose of the first amendment.

 Hopper 4

Works Cited

Greenberg, Robert L. Freedom of Speech Exceptions: Categories of Speech NOT

Protected. 2020, lawshelf.com/shortvideoscontentview/freedom-of-speech-

exceptions-categories- of-speech-not-protected/.

Denyer, Simon. “China's Scary Lesson to the World: Censoring the Internet Works.”

The Washington Post, WP Company, 23 May 2016, www.washingtonpost.com/

world/ asia_pacific/chinas-scary-lesson-to-the-world-censoring-the-internet-

works/ 2016/05/23/413afe78-fff3-11e5-8bb1-f124a43f84dc_story.html.