One of the main examples Wasserman talked about was an incident that happened at a basketball game where Duke versed Maryland. Many of the Maryland fans chanted and sported T-shirts that said “F--- Duke.” Wasserman states:
John K. Anderson, chief of the Educational Affairs Division of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office, advised the university that a written code of fan conduct applicable at a university-owned and -operated athletic facility, if “carefully drafted,” would be constitutionally permissible. (Wasserman 639)
This supports Wasserman’s thesis because he is not against colleges trying to keep their fans antics appropriate. Wasserman later talks about how a code of conduct such as this might not work because it is a public college. Private colleges do not have to follow the same rules and regulations as public colleges, therefore; they are able to have a code of conduct.
Another example that supports Wasserman’s stance is Cohen verse California. This was when a man named Paul Cohen wore a jacket that said “F--- the Draft.” Paul Cohen did not get in trouble because the Supreme Court found this message to be protected in the courthouse. Wasserman says, “Justice John Marshall Harlan’s memorable phrase in Cohen was that ‘one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric,’ and government’s inability to make principled distinctions means ‘the Constitution leaves matters of taste and style so largely to the individual’” (Wasserman 641). This proves that the First Amendment protects us Americans in many circumstances, therefore; if a college wants to write a code of conduct it must be worded carefully. Wasserman also talks about how fans at a stadium have the choice to leave, but in Cohen verse California they were required to stay in the courthouse because it was their job.
Lastly, is the case with Texas Tech’s basketball coach Bob Knight. A few days prior to Texas Tech faceing off against the University of Kansas, Bob Knight got into a verbal altercation with the Texas Tech chancellor at a salad bar. During the
Texas Tech verse Kansas game, the Kansas fans chanted “salad tosser” directed towards Bob Knight. One might think it was because of the altercation day’s prior, but it also had an underlying meaning. Salad tosser is a homosexual phrase that many of the students knew, but surely many of the other fans did not understand it. Many chants have a double entendre, and can be aimed to get a player or in this case a coach off his/her game. It would be harder to enforce a code of conduct with chants that have a double entendre.
This article had a great amount of fact and different scenarios, but I did not like how the thesis was at the end of the article because I did not understand his opinion on the first read. Wasserman showed great evidence inside and also outside of just college sports. I also liked how Wasserman talked about how the First Amendment affects private colleges differently than public colleges. Wasserman used both Ethos and Logos in this article. Ethos was used with all his credible facts given throughout the article. Logos was used throughout the article because he logically showed facts to back up his thesis. This topic is significant to me because I plan on playing college hockey in the upcoming years. I would not want my team to be looked down upon because of something the fans did or said. This is also significant to many young kids who attend these games because they could be easily influenced by some of the fans profanity. I believe that fans should be encouraged to cheer on their team but keep profanity to a minimum. Fan Profanity can put a bad image on the school, influence people in many ways, and cause people to be insecure with going to the games. I believe that because most public college sporting events are paid events that the First Amendment should not apply. Fans pay to watch the game not the profanity, therefore; fan profanity should be eliminated.
by
joepizz (student)
