Theta Tau, Professional Engineering Fraternity -Tau Chapter

Syracuse New York

April 30, 2018

The Readers' Page

Syracuse Media Group
220 S. Warren St.
Syracuse NY 13202

RE: Response to Editorial of 4/27/18 Regarding

Controversy Over Theta Tau Fraternity

To The Editorial Board:

We write in response to the Editorial Board's opinion piece that appeared on

Syracuse.com on Friday, April 27, 2018, and in Sunday's newspaper. Several members of the
Tau Chapter of Theta Tau have been charged with violations of the student Code of Conduct as a
result of the release of videos to the Daily Orange.

The Board chooses to ignore the explanation for the videos' content and, like the
University, focuses on the videos in a vacuum without contextualization. The Board insists the
students are unredeemable and calls for their expulsion in lock step with the University's
administration and faculty. Did the involved members do stupid things? Of course. Are they
racist, sexist, anti-gay criminals? Not even close, and indeed the context of the event shows just
the opposite. Should they expelled for making fun of their fraternity brothers in a satirical,
extreme, offensive manner? Absolutely not.

The Board chooses to ignore that almost half of Theta Tau's members identify as part of
a minority or ethnic group. Tau Chapter of Theta Tau is roughly twice as diverse as the
Syracuse University undergraduate engineering student body. It is our understanding this is also
true of Theta Tau nationally. Theta Tau makes no distinction in admitting members based on
race, gender, religious affiliation, disability, sexual preference or ethnic background. Indeed,
many participants in and observers of the satirical roast on March 30, 2018, were members of an
identified minority religious or ethnic group. A black member used parody to roast fellow black
members and a Jewish member pretended to slander Jews. The videos, albeit offensive, were
indisputably a satirical performance and clearly intended by all those present to lampoon the
invidious characters and attitudes portrayed by the participants. The skits were performed for the
eyes of Theta Tau members only who would understand the context of the roast. There is simply
no support for the Board's simplistic conclusion that the men of Theta Tau "expressed] their
vulgar prejudices." Indeed, the opposite is true as they mocked those that hold such prejudices.

This is not the first time a controversy of this nature has arisen at Syracuse University. In
late 2005, a comedy show entitled "Over the Hill," broadcast on HillTV, the student-run
television station at Syracuse University, and modeled after "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,"

(50783455,1)
was removed from the station's Web site due to concerns about offensive content. Then
Chancellor Nancy Cantor revoked the status of HillTV because administrators said shows on the
station violated university policy. Specifically, while the premise of the parody news show was
to satirize campus and national news, episodes contained potentially offensive jokes about black
people, Indians (both American and those from India), women, date rape, mentally retarded
individuals, eating disorders and even lynching. The Daily Orange, October 28, 2005.

What is notable about HillTV "scandal," is that while the station was ultimately
disbanded as a recognized student organization and then reinstated with a new name and various
stipulations, neither Cantor or any other administrator (unlike the current Chancellor) suggested
or implied that the students involved in "Over the Hill" were actual racists, sexists, promoters of
sexual violence or hostile to people developmental disabilities. In fact, no individual student
involved in writing, producing, performing or filming the offensive content was sanctioned or
disciplined. The University clearly recognized that the comedy show, while offensive, was
satire. The three tenured faculty members who considered HillTV s appeal of suspension
concluded at the time that while the content of "Over the Hill" was offensive and discriminatory,
and "threatened the health and safety of individuals and groups on campus," their intent was:

"[T]o fashion a remedy that responds to the severity of the offense,

the reaction to it, and that maximizes the educational benefit for
all. ... [Suspension, followed by probation, of the organization,
accompanied by significant measures that the organization must
undertake before the suspension can be lifted, hold the greatest
promise that the incidents leading to the hearing can result in a
learning experience - for the organization, for the campus
community and for the community at large."

The Daily Orange, December 1, 2005. At the time, the general manager of the station and
entertainment director apologized "to all the people who were hurt by the content of "Over the
Hill," but no one from the University demanded that individual members of HillTV be expelled
for creating highly offensive content.

Unlike the "Over the Hill" broadcasts, the people offended by the Theta Tau videos were
not, by any reasonable view, a target of the performances. And while the videos have distressed
many on the Hill, they were never intended to be viewed by anyone outside of Theta Tau. While
the Chapter, like HillTV, may ultimately be responsible for the creation of the skits, the
individual members of the Chapter should not be held individually responsible for offensive
satire any more than the reporters and producers of "Over the Hill." We urge the University to
act similarly in connection with the Theta Tau incident. While the Board vilifies members for
taking legal action, the lawsuit is intended to ensure the University follows its own rules and
procedures in detennining an appropriate punishment here.

The University has charged each student known to have been involved in or present
during the videos with causing physical harm or threatening physical harm to persons,
harassment, threatening conduct, including hazing or bullying, and violation of the University's
drug and alcohol policy. But ... there is no evidence in the videos that any person was hazed,

{S0783455.1}
bullied, harmed physically or threatened with physical harm. Nor is there evidence that any
Theta Tau member was drinking or using drugs. Campus administrators have acknowledged that
while the students may not be individually guilty of any of those charges, their collective
conduct made students and groups fearful on campus. Therefore, the University contends the
students are guilty of harassment. However, the videos do not depict harassment as defined by
the Code of Conduct. The words and actions in the videos were not "fighting words" directed at
individuals and they did not have the immediate effect of disrupting the peace. Indeed, no one
outside the fraternity even knew about the videos until weeks after they had been posted in a
private Facebook group. The fraternity itself has already been expelled for the conduct of the
group. There is no legal or factual basis for the University to punish singular persons for the
actions of a group without evidence of individual violations of the student Code of Conduct.

While the actions of the Chapter in sanctioning lewd conduct and vulgarity are
dishonorable, the University's apparent long term failure to address the "hostile" climate
experienced by members of the campus community does not fall at the feet of Theta Tau. As the
Chancellor attempts to "make things better for students and faculty who feel unheard,
unwelcome and on the margins of campus life," neither he nor the University community can
lose sight of the truth recognized by the disciplinary panel in the HillTV case - a respected
University must approach any controversy of this nature as a "learning experience" with the goal
of fairly protecting all of its students, including those charged. In the last 20 years, the
University has not expelled a student for harassment. Indeed, the only cases that have resulted in
expulsions involved physical injury, actual sexual assault, and/or the sale of drugs. Students
have never before been denied the protection and advice of a procedural advisor at informal
disciplinary hearings. Finally, the University has never before prohibited a student from
attending classes while under a disciplinary proceeding without imposing an official interim
suspension. Regardless of the outcome of disciplinary proceedings, the drastic actions taken by
the University are unlike any that have been taken before under similar circumstances; as a
result, they are arbitrary, capricious and a violation of the University's own policies, procedures
and standards for managing discipline.

The Board's misguided refusal to credit the satirical nature of the performance featured
on the videos rivals only the hypocrisy of the University in hosting entertainers who use lyrics or
humor to enthrall on the subjects of race and sexual violence. Indeed, rappers such as Gucci
Mane, who perfonned over the weekend at SU's MayFest, discuss rape graphically and violently
in their lyrics. Comedians like Hasan Minhaj, who was invited to SU last fall, lampoons racist
attitudes with skits entitled "Punish a Muslim Day." Yet, there is a collective excusal of any
offense by these entertainers as merely performance. The same standard should be applied here
to the "stupid," but not intentionally offensive conduct by Theta Tau members.

Theta Tau, Professional Engineering Fraternity - Tau Chapter

{S0783455.1}