Recently, in a Burke County school in Morganton, North Carolina, Khaled Hosseini’s novel The Kite Runner came under fire, for being “inappropriate” reading material for high school students. In one scene of the book, a young boy is brutally attacked and raped. Because of this scene, some parents now want the book removed from the tenth-grade reading list.

Although these parents mean well, they are hardly doing their children any service. By deciding that a book such as The Kite Runner unsuitable, these parents are insulting the intelligence and maturity levels of their children. They are high school students; they will soon be adults, and they are old enough to handle the subjects discussed in The Kite Runner. Some scenes in the book are somewhat hard to stomach, but that hardly constitutes it being banned.

The novel has important themes and morals, which students can learn a lot from. Attempting to censor it does much more damage than good. By doing so, these parents will only increase interest in the book, and will make the students who haven’t been assigned to read the book interested as well. Soon the decision will be made by the school board about whether or not the novel will be removed from the reading list. If the members of the school board have any sense of what is right, they will throw out this case and keep The Kite Runner on the required reading list.

-Zhaleh Breen

Aliya Mood
Profiles Editor, the North Star

The Hazelwood Case defines high school journalism and students’ rights to freedom of speech. Last week while I was in my SAT prep class I came across a reading selection that discussed the infamous Hazelwood Case, and it sparked my mind. According to the case, students’ First Amendment rights stop as they enter the “schoolhouse gate.”

But how is this fair?

Throughout our journey through high school we are taught to express our feelings in class discussions and debates. But as soon as someone shares a belief that is unconventional or offensive, the student is punished with suspension, expulsion, etc.

High school is supposed to prepare us for college, the world beyond our parent’s houses and rows of lockers. But by this decision, how are students supposed to learn about and defend their right to freedom of speech?

In fact many students either don’t know what the First Amendment entails or they take it for granted. In a report done by MSNBC, it revealed that three out of four students took their First Amendment rights for granted or didn’t know how they felt about it. This is a saddening fact. The youths of today are the adults of tomorrow and if they don’t know their rights where will the country be in 15 to 20 years?

But reading the article in my SAT class made me realize that even I take my First Amendment rights for granted, and I forget how lucky I truly am to write for a high school paper that isn’t censored by the school. But as of last week, I stopped taking those rights for granted and I never will again.

Over the edge with disrespecting freedom of the press

Lauren Thiery
Features Editor, the North Star

The world of journalism relating to celebrities, and the rock scene in particular, is vastly different from an everyday news story. The paparazzi and so-called “journalists” alike who hound and stalk celebrities in both their public and private lives bring disgrace to the journalism community. While they should be doing their jobs with honor and integrity, they do it unjustly and improperly to the point of hurting whoever their subject is. Their scandal does not protect the right to freedom of the press, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

A perfect example of this unconstitutional journalistic approach of writing is intertwined in the Rolling Stone story, “Over the Edge With Pete Doherty,” by Mark Binelli. Although stories about rock musicians will typically and truthfully be filled with crude humor, details of an edgy lifestyle and references to illegal activities, they should be reported with integrity. Although these aspects of the person's life may be true, emphasizing them and detailing them to the degree of degrading someone is an improper use of journalistic writing.

For example, in Binelli's story, he writes, “At that moment, the door bursts open and a young woman races past us. She is crying hysterically and not wearing enough clothes for this frigid night. Johnny frowns, then shepherds me inside.” This event was observed at 3:30 a.m. when Doherty, singer of rock bands The Libertines and Babyshambles, was not aware of his visiters peering into his windows. Also, after describing an incriminating tour bus scenario involving heroin and cocaine, he writes, “Moments later, Doherty boards the bus, squints at me and says, ‘You always manage to turn up at the best times, don't you?’”

These two quotations are merely a sample of countless occasions when the line of what is appropriate journalistic behavior and what is not is crossed. Although this particular story is about a British man, who the First Amendment does not apply to, ethical journalism should still be prevalent because instances such as this are only too common around the world. It doesn’t matter what country a story is written in—there should be a universal ethical and moral journalistic approach to writing in which the writer delivers their story honorably and not under false pretenses.