AMERICAN college students must frequently contend with puritanical legislators who wish to control their behavior long past the point where such control is necessary or realistic. The ineffectiveness of state paternalism is perhaps most evident in our drinking laws, which subject the "underage" to three years of inconvenience when they engage in a social activity that is thoroughly ingrained in the college lifestyle. In Virginia, the anti-drinking authoritarianism extends to college newspapers, which are forbidden to run alcohol-related advertising due to a regulation enforced by the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
The ban has annoyed college newspapers for years, especially newspapers that depend on advertising revenue to cover operating expenses. But thanks to a challenge from Virginia Tech's student newspaper, an end to the restriction may be in sight. After correspondence with the ABC proved unsuccessful, the Collegiate Times announced that it is prepared to sue the department in an effort to get the ban overturned.
The American Civil Liberties Union agrees that the ABC regulation violates college students' constitutional rights, and ACLU lawyers are prepared to litigate on the Collegiate Times' behalf if the ABC refuses to cease enforcement by Sept. 22.
Any college student with cable can testify to the fact that this regulation has not shielded students from alcohol advertising, and even without any commercial encouragement, drinking occurs in social activities where friends are likely to be much more influential. When the booze flows freely at fraternity parties every single weekend, it would be ridiculous to suggest that a seductive advertisement in the student newspaper could be responsible for pushing anyone over the edge. The ban does nothing to protect college students from drinking culture, while it selectively punishes student newspapers for a reality that is far beyond their influence.
But above all, the issue at stake is one of freedom of speech. The government can constitutionally dictate an absurdly high drinking age, but to prohibit advertising that even talks about alcohol is a violation of the First Amendment that should not be allowed to stand. In addition to restricting speech, the regulation unfairly discriminates against certain publications based on the fact that their audience consists primarily of college students.
In addition to directly violating the First Amendment by arbitrarily banning certain advertisements, the regulation hurts the ability of student papers to become financially independent, which is crucial to achieving editorial freedom. This summer, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the Seventh District ruled that a Supreme Court ruling that allows high schools to censor their student newspapers can also apply to public colleges and universities if the newspaper is subsidized by the school.
The ruling invites administrators to interfere with their student papers for arbitrary and self-serving reasons, including concern for how criticism might impact their public relations. Students have one important defense against this ruling: selling advertising. If a student newspaper can generate enough revenue to operate without the university's assistance, it can reject subsidies and operate as an independent publication, free of administrative control.
As a result of this loophole, any state regulation that hurts advertising revenue is not only an inconvenience but a threat to the financial independence that allows student newspapers a much greater freedom: the freedom to criticize power without fear of censorship from school authorities. Some newspapers, including The Cavalier Daily, have achieved independence without revenue from alcohol-related advertising, but for struggling publications the additional money could make a significant difference.
Pat Harvey, editor-in-chief of The Cavalier Daily, agreed with the Collegiate Times that the law seems unconstitutional. "It's ludicrous that other papers have the right to print advertisements that we don't have the right to print," said Harvey in an interview. "It puts us at a competitive disadvantage within our community."
Because so many student journalists become professional journalists after graduation, legal restrictions on college newspapers are harmful to the entire notion of free press in America. When student journalists face limits from the government and from their own administrations, they learn that free speech should have limits when power disapproves.
Instead, student newspapers should be an opportunity for young journalists to experience true freedom before they must contend with the pressures of the corporate media that stifle so many talented reporters. College newspapers are published by legal adults for an audience of legal adults, and it's time for our laws to stop patronizing them at the expense of free speech.
Cari Lynn Hennessy's column appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at chennessy@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 20 hours agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | April 18, 2024Our independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
