Say what you want, but be civil about it
We consider the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to be sacred. The right to have voice, state opinions — whether they praise or are critical — is a fundamental right. We also hope people will use their right to free speech as a way to deliver a substantive message — not one that demeans, maligns, threatens, or is just plain mean.
Television and the world of social media offers us the chance to be as critical as we want — no matter who gets hurt. We see messages of hate almost daily. We see hate played out to the level of horrifying as in the nine people who perished in Charleston, S.C., worshiping in a church, at the hands of a young gunman. We also see public displays of demeaning messages at local government meetings. One such case happened at Tuesday’s Lee County school board meeting when a parent wore a T-shirt to the podium during a public input period to offer his criticism of textbook choices. Included in the message on the shirt was “Graham is a sham,” referring to Superintendent Nancy Graham.
The parent, Bob Valenta, whose child is at Fort Myers High School, said he had a right to free speech, and he does. Apparently, he also believes he can be as malicious and convicting as he wants. We hope the right to free speech never gets to the point where people think the only way to deliver an effective message is to put down another human being. It’s ineffective and accomplishes nothing.
All government public meetings, where decisions are made, must include public input. It is the law, and it should be. Giving people a voice is important for accountability, transparency and fairness. Elected officials know criticism will always be part of the culture, and the right of the people. It anchors accountability. But there is a difference between fair and justified criticism and personal attacks.
Most agencies where elected bodies are involved show meetings live on various cable channels and on websites. Public input is included and voices are heard, but these elected officials are not obligated to show demeaning words and personal attacks, specifically on someone’s shirt. The school district chose to keep the camera on his shirt during his tirade. We suggest in these cases to show the person and his shirt momentarily, and then go to a tight shot of the person’s face. There is nothing to be gained by keeping the camera focused on the shirt. There also is precedent for not showing such shirts at all, however.
In Cape Coral, if a person would wear such a shirt to the podium, the camera simply moves off to another view. In fact, if a person directs personal attacks toward a particular council member or anyone else on the dais, the mayor will usually call a “point of order,” the microphone at the podium would be turned off momentarily, and that person would be asked to direct his comments to the council as an entire body, not to a particular name. The same is true for meetings of the Lee County Commission and Bonita Springs City Council. In the Lee commission charter, it states: “All remarks shall be addressed to the commission as a body, and not to any single commissioner thereof. It also says, “any person making irrelevant, impertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the Commission shall not be considered orderly or decorous.”
We also suggest the school board follow its own policy, which says: “attacks on individuals and abusive comments will not be tolerated. If speakers persist in violating such rules, after receiving a warning from the Chair, they may be removed from the meeting.”
When people wear such shirts, slamming an official to a public, televised meeting, their main intent is to be seen, not necessarily heard. There is no effectiveness in such a maneuver.
Yes, the school board has made its share of poor decisions over the last year — initially opting out of state testing without fully understanding the ramifications, recently selecting particular world history and U.S. history textbooks that may not be appropriate or balanced, and then changing its mind on getting those books after a small group of parents complained about their content.
Calling Graham and school board members inappropriate names and threatening them with lawsuits is hardly an effective way of free speech.
Free speech with a message that leads to solutions is effective. Childish criticism with little justification is not.