Our views: ; Let's not cry wolf; over free speech; A civil liberties group should provide proof before blasting Marshall

THE Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is all fired upabout Marshall University's policy on free speech, going so far asto name it as the "Speech Code of the Month," a way of blastingcolleges for prohibiting a "staggering amount of constitutionallyprotected speech."

This was based on Marshall's written policies.

Yet when interviewed by Davin White of the Charleston Gazette,Robert Shibley, the foundation's senior vice president, apparentlycould not cite an example of suppression at Marshall.

In fact, Shibley had to concede that Marshall did the right thingin at least one instance.

Marshall officials cited a student last spring for defacing asidewalk chalk message that announced an upcoming meeting of theLambda organization, a group friendly to gay, lesbian, bisexual andtransgender students.

The student was offended by the group's message. Punishing himactually protected free speech.

Shibley of FIRE said his group would not have defended the manwho defaced the message.

Another case involved a student who wore a hockey mask like aserial killer does in horror films and frightened several students.Shibley said schools don't need speech codes to deal with suchactivity. University officials could simply approach the student andask him not to wear the mask.

But Marshall officials handled the situation carefully. Theycited an old state law that bars the wearing of masks except onHalloween or in bad weather.

The law stems from the days when the Ku Klux Klan had influencein West Virginia.

Marshall officials got a bad rap here, but to their credit, theyare taking a look at what their critic had to say.

"If we are restricting free speech, we're going to take a hardlook at it and not take it lightly," said Steve Hensley, dean ofstudent affairs.

That's the mature reaction.

Officials at Marshall have a duty to provide a safe and orderlyatmosphere in which students can learn. In punishing someone fordefacing a message he did not like, and in telling someone to takeoff a hockey mask, Marshall officials did the right thing.

FIRE might want to review its policies. In citing Marshal withoutany real examples, the foundation looks more like a publicity-seeking group than it does a serious advocate of free speech.