This is about a paragraph that appeared in an article in the N.Y. Times by a writer who is a respected professor of law, that was criticized by another professor of law in his article in the Washington Post. I'm asking those who participate to read the following short paragraph, and then select a choice on how you believe it would be interpreted by a reader.
It is part of a long article about freedom-of-speech protection for a rap video by a high school student,Taylor Bell, where the appeals court decision summarized in the paragraph was only a part of the story. Those readers of the Time's article would not have known in advance, as you do, that there is any question about it. So, try to imagine you just came across it while reading the article in the newspaper.
Those who provide their email and who compete the survey will be sent links to both the New York Times article and the one from the Washington Post, which has a link to my participation in this controversy. By answering the survey, you will be a participant in extending the understanding of formation of political values.
The following is the paragraph that you will answer two questions about:
A divided 16-member panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in New Orleans, rejected Mr. Bell's First Amendment Challenge. Judge Rhesa Hawkins Barksdale, writing for the majority, said the song was “incredibly profane and vulgar” and contained “numerous spelling and grammatical errors.” “If there is to be education,” Judge Barksdale wrote, “such conduct cannot be permitted."