Censorship is the dirty word of journalism. It comes with a certain weight that makes the average journalist, and even the average American, cringe. As a whole, we don't like people telling us what we can and can't say or what we can and can't read. After all, our own autonomy should let us make those decisions for ourselves.

Some recent letters to the editor have decried The Daily Universe's decision to not print recent Dilbert cartoons because of inappropriate references to Jesus Christ. To be upfront about the issue, we make no apologies for swapping the comics for more appropriate editions. Similar decisions are made at The Daily Universe on a regular basis - not solely to protect or reflect the values of our readership, but because such material fails to meet the standards we have set for ourselves.

In cases where something is needlessly offensive (ie: it doesn't serve any higher purpose, such as a comic strip), we have little qualm with not printing whatever the offending material might be. Ultimately, like any newspaper, we reserve complete control over what we do and do not print.

While it may seem blasphemous to some modernists, the unrestrained flow of information (even with something as non-consequential as a cartoon) is not our highest aim at The Daily Universe, nor is it at any reputable news organization. Journalists have a responsibility to their community - not only to provide it with the best possible information that informs and engages its readership, but also to think of the overall good of itself and of the community. News organizations must constantly calculate what is to be gained and lost with what is sent to the press. In this case, the decision was an easy one.

Colorado State University's editorial board recently published an editorial with an expletive criticizing President George W. Bush in its headline. When asked why they chose such an offensive word, the editor-in-chief said he worried that students were becoming complacent in their right to freely express themselves. He wanted to stir up a public discourse in which students could fully test the limits of this right. Missing the whole aim of freedom of speech and the dangers of censorship, he engaged in a battle for something little more than juvenile and trite.

The unrestrained flow of information cannot be the ultimate good for a news organization. It is a marvelous good and a good for which we will always fight, but a good that cannot be made sovereign. Something isn't good because it is free. It is good because of the ideals for which it stands. Necessarily, something must be free in order to ultimately be good, but its own liberality does not make it good. For this reason newspapers fight against outside restrictions. But freedom from outside restrictions does not absolve media outlets of their own standards and responsibilities.

This editorial represents the opinion of The Daily Universe editorial board. Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of BYU, its administration or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Copyright Brigham Young University 17 Mar 2008