EDITORIAL//1st Amendment

What constitutes the line between harmless fun and obscenity? According to the administrative restrictions imposed upon the yearbook of a particular senior team picture in the yearbook, obscenity doesn’t have to involve anything indecent, but rather simply the merest suggestion is obscene. The incident that clarifies this new stipulation of school policy was disagreement over a picture taken by the yearbook’s professional photographer, Marcy Dugan, shown below:
The swim team uniform has always engendered a certain amount of alarm, for example when the boys’  wear their speedos on Sports Day during spirit weeks has caused alarm among the more Puritanical. This is despite their protests that they are simply wearing their uniforms. A speedo alone has been deemed inappropriate for school dress code. For the yearbook sports pictures, however, all teams always are presented with equipment and in uniform. This year, the team decided it would be clever to use kickboards to cover what is technically more skin than their uniforms; the girls followed this act. However, because they hid their straps behind the boards, the administrator thought that  the illusion of nakedness was in itself obscene.
This “illusion of nakedness” is what Co-Principal Harada condemned. Upon hearing their picture would be excluded from the yearbook, several students from the team approached Ms. Harada, namely seniors Dayne Contarsy, Alex Richardson, Haley Cox, Kylie Langlois, and Sam Nusbaum. In addition to this, Mrs. Richardson, Alex’s mother, wrote an email protesting the censorship of this picture. Nonetheless, the official stance was firm. The yearbook is an official publication representing El Segundo High School, and the decision was based on the fact that we live in a very “conservative community” and that the swim team is not supposed to be a “strip club.” Of course, the question begs to be asked, Is there any actual infringement of the law? Where is the spirit of fun at this school?
However, Ms. Harada considered this irrelevant, because the school is now under a “new regime.” This article is not meant to condone inappropriate behavior, but it is rather worrisome that no diligence is being paid to the fact that the picture was meant to taken lightly, that no actual exposure occurred (you can even see the suits behind some of the kickboards), and perhaps worst of all, the fact that the term “regime” could be applied to a school. It is true that perhaps during heated discussions, tensions can run high, but nonetheless a school is meant to be a supportive learning environment, and the connotation as well as the attitude that “regime” imply are both very contradictory to this ideal.
Perhaps a moment needs to be taken to clarify the protective bounds of freedom of speech. The California Educational Code gives student publications protects both the Bay Eagle and the Golden Eagle Yearbook from censorship, including prior restraint. Contrary to what some believe, State and Federal Law dictate that there is no legal difference between a newspaper and a yearbook that is distributed to students. The following are citations of important passages from California Education Code 48907 and their direct implications:

Section	Language	Implication
Section (e)	“Official school publications” refers to material produced by pupils in the journalism, newspaper, yearbook, or writing classes and distributed to the student body either free of for a fee.	Yearbooks are subject to the same laws that protect newspapers. Thus, if the Bay Eagle could print the photo, so can the yearbook.
Section (d)	There shall be no prior restraint of material prepared for official school publications except insofar as it violates this section.  School officials shall have the burden of showing justification without undue delay prior to a limitation of pupil expression under this section.	Student publications are not subject to “prior restraint,” unless it obscene, libelous, slanderous or will cause a substantial disruption to the school.
Section (a)	Students of the public schools shall have the right to exercise freedom of speech and of the press including, but not limited to, the use of bulletin boards, the distribution of printed materials or petitions, the wearing of buttons, badges, and other insignia, and the right of expression in official publications, whether or not such publications or other means of expression are supported financially by the school or by use of school facilities, except that expression shall be prohibited which is obscene, libelous, or slanderous. Also prohibited shall be material which so incites students as to create a clear and present danger of the commission of unlawful acts on school premises or the violation of lawful school regulations, or the substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.	Unless obscene, libelous, or slanderous material can be proven in a court of law, the picture cannot be removed from the yearbook.

 

All in all, the lesson from this is clear. This incident has once again pushed the line demarking obscenity even farther back into previously acceptable fun; also freedom of expression has been denied on the whim of the administration. Students, keep your heads down, and take into account the penalties your actions might incur under this regime.

<< Back

The Bay Eagle welcomes viewpoints on all matters. Signed letters and articles represent personal viewpoints and not that of the staff. Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the editorial staff. The viewpoints expressed are not those of the El Segundo School Board, Administration, Faculty or Staff. The Bay Eagle is a public student forum. First Amendment of the US Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.