Schools limit athlete free speech and hinder learning from social media
It can be tempting for collegiate coaches like Florida State’s Jimbo Fisher and Clemson’s Dabo Swinney to limit athlete social media accounts, especially after seeing Ohio State’s quarterback Cardale Jones’ “we ain’t come to play SCHOOL,” Twitter post. However, this practice may be stripping First Amendment rights from athletes.
College athletics have always wanted to limit the conduct of their athletes to keep them on the field and to improve the reputation of the school. The question is: where should we draw the line? This social media debate has garnered national attention from media outlets like ESPN and has good points on both sides of the issue.
The Tallahassee Democrat wrote an article in support of social media bans from Florida State. The article said that student athletes are too young and “dumb” to be trusted with social media accounts during practice and the season. It also points out that many of the writers who say that the ban is against the First Amendment would be the same writers who would broadcast athletes’ inappropriate posts to the world and gain personal attention.
“In this day and age the risk so far outweighs the reward that I wouldn’t be surprised if every big-time program in the country starts adopting this policy,” wrote Tallahassee Democrat reporter, Corey Clark.
Opponents of the ban have another point to consider when deciding to ban social media: the message you are sending to the players and the fact that it might be unconstitutional for public schools.
The Executive Director of the Student Press Law Center, Frank LoMonte said that it is almost certain that public universities would break the First Amendment by passing blanket bans on social media on their athletes.
LoMonte says it may be within the law to enforce lesser restrictions (like the NFL’s social media ban before games) but it would be hard to justify high level restrictions which are becoming more common place.
In addition, A Footballscoop.com article says these limitations send a negative message that social media is less of a useful tool and more of a distraction.
Clark responded to similar concerns by pointing out Florida State’s 46–4 football record since implementing the social media ban. Clark is applying the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” idea.
However, these bans would limit players like Oklahoma’s Eric Striker and Hatari Byrd from making effective apologies like the ones they made this week for offensive conduct towards fans after a game against Tennessee.
These are the posts Eric Striker and Hatari Byrd wanted (and were) posted on social media to tell the world that they were remorseful for their conduct.
This shows some of the benefits of allowing athletes to use social media.
The Footballscoop.com article said the ban enforces the idea that teaching athletes in college how to use social media responsibly is not worth the program’s time.
Allowing athletes social media gives them the chance to learn from their mistakes. Even Cardale Jones recovered from his post and is making up for it on the field, leading the Ohio State Buckeyes football team to the national championchip in 2014, and the internet with these remedying posts’
It if fine for schools to educate students on the dangers of their posts. If inappropriate posts are made the team has the ability to punish the player and allow him or her to apologize.
I am proud the Horned Frogs are allowed to conduct their own social media accounts here at Texas Christian University.
“We allow our athletes to participate in the global discussions taking place on social media. To do otherwise would undermine the TCU mission statement,” said TCU’s Assistant Athletic Director for Media Relations, Mark Cohen.
TCU quarterback, Trevone Boykin, uses his social media account to support TCU and charitable causes.
This is why all athletes should have access to social media.
