Serving  North San Diego County

North San Diego County

The Paper - Escondido San Marcos North County 
Cover Story
Daily Chuckle
Local News
Social Butterfly
Letters to the Editor
Professional Advice
.....The Computer
.....Your Body Can
..... Heal Itself!
Pet of the Week
Capitol Report
Service Directory
Business & Professions
Where to find
The Paper
How to Subscribe
Contact Us
Search the site











Editorial March 19th, 2009



Add Cal State San Marcos to the list of institutions practicing censorship.

Jackie Carbajal, a senior at CSUSM and the editor of the campus newspaper, The Pride, took it upon herself, apparently without consulting legal counsel as to the constitutionality of her action, to reject the paid advertisement of a group seeking to promote a boycott of Mexico, for cause, and to demand enforcement of existing illegal immigration laws.

The details are more completely contained within our local news story found on page four but we use this page to opine as to “Why?” Why are so many institutions in North San Diego County willing to violate state and federal constitutional rights to free speech and a free press? What are they afraid of? The truth? I suspect those are the primary reasons. We have reproduced the offending ad (at least to Ms. Carbajal) below. We see absolutely nothing wrong with it. We see it as an expression of free speech and freedom of the press. Recent legal opinions have held that commercial free speech/free press is also protected.

The Paper has certainly had our share of censorship issues within the past year. First Palomar Pomerado Health censored The Paper by refusing us legal access to their waiting rooms, to which we had been delivering for the past seven years; then came Kaiser Permanente in San Marcos, since resolved; then Kaiser Permanente in both San Marcos and Escondido, both since apparently resolved; then Tri-City Hospital seeking to bar our distribution of The Paper immediately following our cover story opposing their bond issue.

Now comes, from an institution of higher learning, mind you, what appears to be a first class case of censorship.

It seems to us someone should have to pay punitive damages for this intentional infliction of restriction of a free press. Only then will they respect the right of a free press. Until that time, they will ride roughshod over people or companies who do not have the funds to fight them in court. So far, no attorney has come forward to offer pro-bono assistance.






New Page 4