Friday, April 20, 2007

Olentangy Liberty's latest edition of The Cannon

Three cheers to the Olentangy Liberty High School student newspaper The Cannon on their latest edition. The paper used the power of satire to make a point on the recent controversy over articles published in the student papers at Liberty and Olentangy High Schools.

Hats off to the students, the faculty advisor, and the school administration for the courage to allow The Cannon to make a statement with satire. It really is about giving students the opportunity to develop their critical thinking skills -- and this was a great demonstration of what can happen if you allow it unfold.

And just for the heck of it, here's another great example from The Onion on one my favorite public radio shows.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

Tim,

I would love to read the satire in the Cannon. Can you post it?

thanks:)

Tim Eby said...

Unfortunately they don't print an on-line version.

Anonymous said...

“Three cheers to the Olentangy Liberty High School student newspaper The Cannon on their latest edition. The paper used the power of satire to make a point on the recent controversy over articles published in the student papers at Liberty and Olentangy High Schools. Hats off to the students, the faculty advisor, and the school administration for the courage to allow The Cannon to make a statement with satire. It really is about giving students the opportunity to develop their critical thinking skills -- and this was a great demonstration of what can happen if you allow it unfold.”

What is to cheer about? That the student “journalists” did not learn an important lesson from the legitimate admonishment they received, and that they are not above standards of language and expression that bind non-“journalist” students? That the faculty advisor encouraged them to, in essence, give the middle finger and a big, fat f**k y** to the administration and school board? That the administration and school board tolerated this B.S.? What is to cheer about? I’d love to know.

It is one thing to challenge authority. It is quite another thing to disrespect it. If your manager admonished you for creating a news piece that was out of line to the standards of your organization you would never respond with a “satirical” piece to criticize management’s stand on the issue. You know you would be shown the door. As someone who manages people in a news organization, if one of your subordinates responded with an on-air satirical piece that criticized your admonishment of him you would show him the door, too. Why do you pretend that the Beacon/Cannon issue is any different? We have an employee, in the faculty advisor, who used (and disgustingly hid behind) her students to publicly criticize her manager and employer—the superintendent and school board. As a former school board member and manager in the broadcast profession you know this and understand what happened, yet you relish this outcome. Why? I’d love to know. I’d like to believe you support the faculty advisor on philosophical grounds and not because she cowers behind the statements of others, like you do. But, you certainly cannot support her on philosophical grounds because, as a manager and broadcast professional, you know her actions were unjustified, amounted to professional misconduct and should not be tolerated—much less applauded. What, then, is the basis of your support?

Let’s take your ridiculous statement and substitute the subjects to illustrate the point:

“Three cheers to Joe Insubordination in his latest on-air report. He used the power of satire to make fun of me on the air to show his displeasure of my admonishment of him. Hats off to Joe and the producer for having the courage to air a satirical piece that criticizes my editorial decisions. It really is about giving employees the opportunity to develop their critical thinking skills -- and this was a great demonstration of what can happen if you allow it unfold.”

Three cheers indeed, huh Timmer…

Your endorsement of the students’ “satirical” response shows that you still harbor pretensions of censorship that you acknowledged in a previous post did not occur, and do not occur because the school board has editorial control of student publications. Please explain why you support the students’ disrespect of the administration and school board as a triumph over censorship, which you know did not take place. Why do you continue to be intellectually dishonest? Please respond to this, in plain language without abstract mumbo jumbo. Look at this as an opportunity to finally come clean and be truthful.

PS. The student “journalists” warned in the letter that accompanied the “satirical” edition of the Cannon that curbing gratuitous, graphic sexual content, like which appeared in the February edition, endangers frank discussion of “…important matters such as anorexia and internet predators”. I find it interesting that they could not bring themselves to use the very topics at the center of the controversy—oral sex and getting laid—to exemplify “important matters”, nor could they bring themselves to defend those topics directly. It was as nonsensical a statement as “buy apples in order to consume more oranges”. Truth is, the student “journalists” cannot defend the garbage they published in the February edition—only their right to print it, which is not a right at all and you know it.

Anonymous said...

Yes...many cheers to the Cannon staff and advisor for a job well done. And to hell with censorship!

Anonymous said...

That's right--to hell with censorship!

Maybe you'll one day you'll learn how to recognize it.

Anonymous said...

OUCH!.......:)

Anonymous said...

Three Cheers to the Community!

Many calls of protest—and not just the “voices of a small minority” as the “Tim Ebys” would have us believe—have apparently put enough downward pressure on the school board to let Cannon newspaper faculty advisor Cathie Boone know that her supplemental contract for that position would not be renewed. No doubt the recent “satirical” edition of the Cannon—probably instigated by Boone herself—proved to be the final offense and weighed heavily in the board’s decision to take responsible action.

At long last the board has applied some private sector discipline to matters concerning the school district. The era of “Anything Goes” at the Beacon and Cannon has finally come to an end. The hysterical “Tim Eby’s” will lament that Olentangy student journalism has entered the Dark Ages. I beg to differ. Now adults will be in charge to ensure that students publish newspapers befitting tax payer-funding, with commonsense community standards of decorum and not produce tabloids that are geared to teenagers’ base impulses. This is a good start.

Tim Eby said...

As I've written earlier, owning the printing press gives the owner the right to choose how that press can be used.

I don't know, nor can I speak for Ms. Boone, but I'm sure she knew the risk she was taking with her editorial decisions.

And I'm sure that any qualified journalism teacher will know the risk of accepting the position to replace Ms. Boone given what's happened here.

So in the end what's the result of this?

I hope the result is that the students who feel betrayed by their school leadership create and publish a newspaper on their own web site. They can use the independence of the Internet to freely publish something that addresses subjects for the student constituency they reach with the student newspaper.

Since newspapers are so 20th Century anyway it would be a good decision for their readership.

As for The Cannon, maybe the OLSD can find someone from Fox News to serve as the mouthpiece of the administration.

By the way, www.libertycannon.com is available as a URL.

Anonymous said...

Tim, thank you for equating the sanity that OLSD displayed with something one would find on Fox News. That is a great compliment.

Let it be noted that the presentation of news on Fox is more balanced than it is on NPR. NPR, like our school system, is little more than a taxpayer funded left-wing echochamber.

Unlike you (an obvious partisan), I am politically agnostic (though intensely politically aware), listen to NPR, watch Fox/CNN/MSNBC/CSPAN etc. NPR and PBS are by far more biased than any other major broadcast entity.

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

It is my understanding that Ms. Boone resigned.....perhaps some facts are not straight here.

Anonymous said...

See the Bill Moyers interview interview with Jon Stewart

I'm interested in hearing your comments about it.

Anonymous said...

The following post is my opinion, as I do not have first-hand insight into what happened regarding Cathie Boone's resignation as faculty advisor for the OLHS Cannon. But let’s apply some practical analysis and reasoning to determine the most likely course of events:

I believe Ms. Boone's self-described "resignation" is not credible in light of her demonstrated defiance; and I find the timing of her announcement is not consistent with the lifecycle of the issue as a news item.

Ms. Boone defiantly allowed the Cannon faculty to publish a sex edition even after the Beacon's sex edition, published a week before the Cannon’s went to print, drew widespread condemnation. Then she allowed the follow-up "satirical" edition, which was an obvious "F*** You" to the administration, board and community. The latter convinced me that both actions were calculated.

Ms. Boone displayed a "to hell with you" attitude to the administration, board and community on both occasions. A stubborn refusal to step down as faculty advisor would have been more consistent with her attitude and actions than some hastily written mea culpa deminutivum and incredible Dispatch comments. In the Dispatch article she hinges her decision to step down on specious proclamations such as "…there’s been enough coverage” and “...this issue needs to die"--even though the firestorm quelled two weeks ago. Given these contradictions to posture and timing, the prospect of Ms. Boone resigning under her own volition is about as believable as the tale Education Director Eric Gordon fabricated when he announced that it was the teachers who retracted "Perks of a Wallflower" from the 9th Grade reading list, when we all know that the administration pulled it.

I have no ax to grind with Cathie Boone, as I do not know her personally. However, I do believe she was incredibly irresponsible and showed very poor judgment. And when she was admonished for her irresponsibility and poor judgment I believe she abused her authority and despicably used her students to criticize the administration, school board and community.

Regardless of what transpired behind the scenes, I believe Ms. Boone’s “resignation” as faculty advisor of the Cannon is a positive outcome and marks a step in the right direction.

Anonymous said...

Congratulations to the Beacon and the Cannon on their numerous awards through the Northeast Ohio Scholastic Press Association....a job well done by students and advisors!

Anonymous said...

Congratulations to the Beacon staff is in order. It is a first class publication and we want to keep it that way.

Editions with inappropriate content damage the prestige of the publication and undermine the hard work that has made it such a success. Until Pulitzers are awarded to tabloids the Beacon (and Cannon) should continue to aspire to standards worthy of the kind of journalistic recognition it received today.

Anonymous said...

What is "inappropriate" is just an opinion.Both the Beacon and the Cannon are for a high school audience....get over it. You probably never read it until "all of the fuss".

Anonymous said...

"What is "inappropriate" is just an opinion.Both the Beacon and the Cannon are for a high school audience....get over it. You probably never read it until "all of the fuss"."

You're incorrect. It's not "opinion" but "judgement". By any rational community standard articles debating the virtues of oral sex and pointers on getting laid, and references to bestiality and "pimp juice", among numerous other vulgarities, do not belong in a tax payer-funded student newspaper.

I had never read either newspaper before "all of this fuss"...just like I'd never analyzed our school budget until I was made aware of some of the wasteful expenditures. As one of those who "own the printing press", it doesn't matter that I didn't read the Beacon or Cannon with regularity before "all of this fuss". What matters now is that I'll be applying much scrutiny to what students publish on the taxpayer dime.

Anonymous said...

Good Luck....man, what anger!

:):):)

Anonymous said...

No anger here. I smile when I post here because the twisted logic of its host and sycophants is so much fun to unravel.

Anonymous said...

boo hoo! No unraveling here...my mind is my own, and that, you can never dictate.....:)

Anonymous said...

Correction: Those who post here aren't sycophants. That's an incorrect characterization and I apologize. Like Mr. Eby and myself, those who post here have an intense interest in the affairs of our school district. We just have different perspectives (some profound) on how our district schools should be managed.

If I come off as course, well, that's because I have become so. If you look at the evolution of my posts, they became increasingly "pointed" (sarcastic) after Mr. Eby's non responses to my challenges and, when he did respond they were nonsensical ramblings (no offense, Timmer).

I have little patience for nonsense that is framed as logic and intellectually lazy people who hide behind simplistic symbols (e.g. "censorship") to avoid applying reasoned thought to an issue or argument. I learned from a mentor long ago that "it's best to keep your mouth shut and look the fool than to open it and remove all doubt". That credo has guided my every communication--verbal and written--since I learned it and it has made me a more disciplined thinker and communicator.

Though everyone has a right to express their opinions, nobody has a right to their own facts.

I bust on Tim Eby a lot, but I do have an appreciation and respect for his passions which are the same as mine.

At risk of becoming a sycophant myself I'll end this discussion here.

Anonymous said...

Point well taken..thanks!