From: greeny@top.cis.syr.edu (J. S. Greenfield)
Subject: Censorship at Syracuse University CST
Organization: Syracuse University, CIS Dept.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 01:18:15 EDT

Some of you (those of you who are reading this from Syracuse 
University, and who have ventured through the Center for Science 
and Technology (CST)) may have seen a sign on my door proclaiming, 
"THIS DOOR HAS BEEN CENSORED by order of Michael Serafini and P. 
Bruce Berra."  For those of you who have been wondering what it 
all means, please read on.

I have endeavored to make this summary as brief as possible--but 
it has still turned out to be quite long.  I have broken the 
summary into segments relating to various aspects of the matter.  
If you get tired of reading about one aspect, I hope this will 
make it easier to just jump to the next segment and continue.


----------

Michael Serafini (the building manager of CST) has, at the 
direction of P. Bruce Berra (the professor who is, apparently, 
administratively in charge CST), been illegaly removing and 
stealing items posted on my office door.

Mr. Serafini and Prof. Berra have made conflicting claims as to 
why this is being done.  I was informed, via the administration of 
my department, that Prof. Berra and Mr. Serafini had complained 
that one item posted on my door was "in bad taste" and was in 
violation of a building policy against such.  Later, Mr. Serafini 
claimed that the posted item violated a building policy 
prohibiting posted items on office doors, across-the-board, with 
the exception of "office hours etc."

Unfortunately for them, there are a few problems with these 
claims.

----------

Firstly, I have maintained an office in CST since it was opened in 
March of 1989.  Those of us with offices in CST had never before 
been informed of any such policy against postings on office doors, 
and perhaps more importantly--as is normal for any office building 
on this campus, many people have made a regular practice of 
posting various non-academic items on their doors.  Personally, I 
have posted such items on my door at varying times throughout the 
last three and a half years, and continuously for the last year 
and a half.

In addition, since this problem arose, I have photographed more 
than thirty doors in CST that have non-academic items posted on 
them--ranging from cartoons, to politically-related materials, to 
flags.

None of these other items have been affected by the alleged CST 
building policy.

----------

The second problem with CST management's claims is that they 
directly violate several university regulations.  For example, 
students' rights to free expression is protected by the Statement 
of Student Rights and Responsibilities (SU Student Handbook 1992-
93, pps. 159-160), which states:

"Students have the right to express themselves freely on any 
subject provided they do so in a manner that does not violate the 
Code of Student Conduct.  Students in turn have the responsibility 
to respect the rights of all members of the University to exercise 
these freedoms."

The preamble of that document states:

"As members of the University community, students can reasonably 
expect that the following rights will be respected by all 
University offices, programs, employees and organizations."

and describes the statement as "values which this community has 
deemed fundamental to its mission and integral to its growth."


In addition, the "Protests and Demonstrations" section of 
University Policies (SU Student Handbook 1992-93, pps. 177-178) 
states:

"Syracuse University is committed to the principle that freedom of 
expression is essential to the search for truth, and consequently, 
welcomes and encourages the expression of different and varied 
opinions and of dissent.  Students may assemble in an orderly 
manner and engage in any peaceful protest and demonstrations that 
do not violate the Code of Student Conduct or the Campus 
Disruption Policy."


In addition, CST management's acts of removal in this case violate 
several other university regulations, including a prohibition 
against illegal seizures in the Statement of Student Rights, and 
several clauses of SU's "Campus Disruption" policy (which SU just 
rewrote to make explicit that the policy applies to all members of 
the university community, including faculty, staff and 
administration--SU Student Handbook 1992-93, pps. 172-174).

I doubt that a full exposition of all relevant SU regulations is 
warranted here, as it would take quite a bit of space and it 
doesn't shed any further light on the question of SU regulations.

The matter is quite simple--numerous SU regulations both protect 
free expression, and prohibit the actions which Mr. Serafini and 
Prof. Berra have taken.

----------

But what is perhaps most shameful for Mr. Serafini and Prof. Berra 
is the authoritarian, adversarial, and spiteful manner in which 
they have addressed this matter.

The original complaint stemmed from a "Sexual Harassment Consent 
Form" which had been posted on my door for almost six months, with 
the words "BANNED AT UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA" emblazoned across the 
bottom.  Those of you reading this on alt.censorship will likely 
recall the thread in which this form appeared and was discussed 
last February and March.  As I had suggested others do, I posted 
the form, with the additional message, in protest against the 
University of Arizona's appalling act of censorship.

Prof. Berra and Mr. Serafini complained that this item was 
"insensitive," "trivialized the problem of sexual harassment," was 
"in bad taste," and was "potentially offensive."

The very first thing that I did upon being informed of this was to 
point out that the item was not at all intended to do any of the 
above (except inasmuch as I hoped that people would be offended by 
the University of Arizona's appalling act of censorship), and to 
suggest that we sit down so that I could explain why I felt that 
they had misinterpreted the posting, and so that they could 
explain their concerns regarding the item.

I made it quite clear that I was very willing to sit down to 
discuss their concerns, and to seriously consider removing the 
item.  I also made it clear, however, that a simple matter of free 
expression rights was involved, and that under no circumstances 
would I remove the item under any threat of compulsion to do so.

My offer was met with a simple threat that I would lose the posted 
material if I did not remove it myself.

----------

In fact, Mr. Serafini did remove the form from my door the very 
next day.  In addition, he removed a "New Official Politically 
Correct Terms 1991" which had been posted on my door for more than 
a year, and which had never been questioned or alleged to be 
"offensive" or "in bad taste."

Shockingly, Mr. Serafini did *not* remove one other item, a 
political cartoon, from my door--thereby eliminating any 
credibility for the claim that this action was the result of some 
across-the-board policy against non-academic postings.

I replaced the two removed items, and in an attempt to stem any 
possible misinterpretation or offense due to the "Sexual 
Harassment Consent Form," I additionally posted a note stating 
that the form was not intended to be offensive, and inviting any 
individual who was concerned about the form to contact me in order 
to discuss those concerns.

By this time, I had filed a complaint with Dean Edward Golden and 
the Office of Student Affairs, and I had been informed that the 
management of CST was concerned about the selective enforcement of 
its regulations, and would hold off on any further action until 
the CST building committee, which was alleged to be responsible 
for the posting policies, had a chance to meet to discuss the 
matter.

I was supposed to be able to repost the material without further 
removal, at least until that time.

----------

But this was not the case.  The material on my door was removed 
again--and this time, Mr. Serafini removed everything, including 
the political cartoon which he had left up previously, and 
including the note which I had posted in an attempt to prevent 
anyone from being offended.

At the same time, not one of the other doors with non-academic 
materials posted was touched by the management of CST.

At this time, as part of a normal change with the new academic 
year, I moved from my third floor office to an office on the first 
floor.  I decided not to repost the the materials which had been 
removed from my door, but rather, to post the "This door has been 
censored" sign, along with a post that excerpted relevant SU 
regulations regarding free expression.

CST management, apparently emabarassed by their own actions, 
decided that these postings, too, were unacceptable, and removed 
the two items.

Apparently, it is even against CST policy to post SU's *own* 
regulations!!

Since that time, Mr. Serafini has repeatedly removed these two 
items, and I have repeatedly reposted them, every time I return to 
my office.

----------

Currently, I have a formal grievance pending with the Office of 
Student Affairs, and since CST management has expressed a 
disinterest in sitting down to discuss this matter, I am waiting 
for Student Affairs to convene an Ad Hoc Grievance Committee, to 
hear my grievance.  (This is the procedure required by the 
Syracuse University Student Grievance Procedures--SU Student 
Handbook 1992-93, pps. 169-170.)

-- 
J. S. Greenfield                                         greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here, 
but my d*mn system wants a 
*real* name!)                        "What's the difference between an orange?"
Newsgroups: alt.censorship