The Oberlin College Series
Posted Oct 26, 2019 at 16:55. Revised Jun 10, 2021 at 09:39.
Visit OberlinChaos Clubhouse to see the latest posts and developments.
Aphabetical Index of all Posts
Random index of All Posts.
Slander is not included in freedom of speech!
College president Ambar has repeatedly pushed the bogus argument that there are First Amendment free speech issues at play in the Gibsons v. Oberlin College legal matter. Based on compelling evidence, the jury held that the college and Dean Meridith Raimondo were guilty of slander, but…
Libel and slander are NOT included in free speech! Had the trustees set up and enforced policies and procedures defining defamation and slander and defining how to speak in the College’s name, the Gibson mess would not have happened. All that should be necessary policy-wise would be a requirement that no one can present libel or slander as having the College’s endorsement. Individuals can say whatever they want, but no one can be allowed to shove words or ideas down the college’s throat without the College’s consent. So why is freedom of speech being used as a smokescreen to obscure something? It is bungling — or something more serious — like a gullible BOT that has been lied to by trusted subordinates?
Freedom of speech does not license everyone to speak for the College
The Oberlin College General Faculty currently can commit the college to positions, either foolish or wise. This is as it should be, but there is no known requirement for the faculty to formulate official positions in consultation with the administration. Consultation and coordination are not infringements on free speech; they are protectors of it.
The free speech policy should ban public engagement in defamatory actions using college communication facilities such as bulletin boards or college email. There needs to be a designated committee or persons to review writings, activities, or publicity that implicitly or explicitly represent themselves as being endorsed by the college. Additionally, the college email template would probably require a disclaimer in its footer, as is done by many law firms. The failure to define a clear policy for authorizing official positions has established a trial lawyer’s paradise.
Copyright © 2018-2024 Charles E. Dial. All rights reserved.
The purpose of this blog is to tell the other side of the other side of the , OSCA, the Kosher-Halal Co-op, faculty independence, and UAW stories to Oberlin Alumni lest they believe the College’s heavily redacted and whitewashed version of events. Please tell your fellow Obies how the Trustee-Politburo has damaged the Gibsons, the College’s reputation, the worth of our degrees, the college’s union workers, K-H, faculty independence, and the OSCA Co-op tradition. No sleazy PR can divert attention from the BOT’s negligence in these matters. Speak up and insist that the BOT arrest its compulsive, neo-Puritan righteousness, which has already eradicated THOUSANDS of $36,000 scholarships, a cooperating union, K-H, the OSCA Student Co-op, and hobbled a world class faculty — just to wreck a tiny bakery!
