Attempted Censorship of The Outlook

Attempted CensorshipThe Outlook staff was made aware that copies of a previous issue were removed from stands, apparently, by someone unrelated to the newspaper. 

The Oct. 16 issue was removed from stands in the Student Center. The copies of The Outlook were replaced with copies of Monmouth Magazine, on which President Patrick Leahy graced the cover. This occurred just prior to Leahy‚Äôs Installation, when there would have been a large influx of visitors to campus as well as the Homecoming weekend events that followed the Installation. 

The stand in the Student Center, specifically, was described as being well stocked with papers the night before. While the Student Center stands were somehow empty when the Installation/Homecoming events commenced, not one other stand anywhere on campus was remotely empty.

 If there was actually added public interest in this issue, one would expect many of the stands to reflect this. However, it was only the Student Center, which had Monmouth Magazine openly displayed in place of The Outlook. 

So, why would that happen? What was the reason behind what seems to be an attempt to censor the paper?

That week, there were no reported scandals or news stories that would have reflected Monmouth in a negative light. So why were the papers seen as unfit for public eyes and removed from stands?

Perhaps it was the editorial that week that set someone on edge. The editorial discussed a few ways in which some administrators/staff have attempted to influence or limit the voice of students at the University; in particular, student-athletes, resident assistants, and others holding positions connected to the institution.

Because our staff were not involved in removing the copies, it leads us to believe that an individual or individuals in power played a part in their replacement. Is this not an example of an attempt to silence the student voice? And, could that not be considered theft as well?

Those papers belong to the University community and some individual felt it acceptable to keep them from readers. 

It has been many years since an individual at this University felt it was appropriate to deny the students and the rest of the community a legitimate voice in the Press. 

We write this editorial not knowing, at the moment, who precisely took this despicable action. Rest assured, when the paper does become aware of who perpetrated this theft, we will write again. 

Our outrage is not only at the fact that someone attempted to silence a legitimate, fair, responsible voice at this institution, but at the idea that at a University, our University, someone with some level of power and responsibility saw fit to place their agenda above the sacred role of the First Amendment. 

We, however, will continue our pursuit of truth and public discourse on this campus regardless of any efforts to keep us from doing so.

PHOTO TAKEN by The Outlook