{"id":4014,"date":"2025-01-24T08:58:24","date_gmt":"2025-01-24T13:58:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.ohio.edu\/library-archives-blog\/?p=4014"},"modified":"2025-01-24T08:58:24","modified_gmt":"2025-01-24T13:58:24","slug":"jour-4130-green-goat","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.ohio.edu\/library-archives-blog\/2025\/01\/24\/jour-4130-green-goat\/","title":{"rendered":"The Scandalous Rise and Fall of the Green Goat"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By Jaida Carroll, Journalism \u201925, and Audrey Eary, Journalism \u201826 for JOUR 4130 Gender, Race, and Class in Journalism and Mass Media with Victoria LaPoe, Fall 2024<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During the fall 2024 semester, the staff of the Mahn Center for Archives and Special Collections worked intensively with Victoria La Poe\u2019s JOUR 4130 class, Gender, Race, and Class in Journalism and Mass Media. The students explored, selected, and researched materials from the collections, then worked in small groups to prepare presentations. The students had the option to then expand their research into a blog post like this one for their final project.<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Green Goat<\/em><\/a> was a humor student publication at Ohio University but was never given the official title of a university backed publication. The first<\/a> and second<\/a> issues were in 1913, but the third<\/a> edition was not released until 1922 due to a lack of interest and because of the serious matter of World War I<\/a>. The publication then continued until the Great Depression<\/a>, when it ceased in 1933 and then reemerged in 1954 as an on-campus publication. The publication earned its scandalous reputation on campus and in the community from the censor-free environment and reporting on topics uncommon for a school-related publication. The Green Goat<\/em> also stressed the importance of using the publication for other forms of creativity, such as photography, art and advertising. \u201cWhile we of the GOAT…feel that it is wrong to assume that creativity and experience lies only in the field of writing\u201d (Green Goat<\/em>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n
Covers of the Green Goat, from fall 1956<\/a> (left) and fall 1927<\/a> (right).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Green Goat<\/em> often used its freedom of not being sponsored by the school to indirectly call out school-sponsored newspapers for gatekeeping. Gatekeeping<\/a> is the process of news reporters and editors making decisions about what to include and what not to include in the media. There are many distinct reasons editors and reporters must select what gets covered in the news. Restricted space or time and adhering to the publication’s values are common reasons for news being left out of a report. However, there can be other reasons to withhold information, such as aligning with the sponsor’s values of the news publication, more specifically, following the rules and regulations of a university newspaper and aligning the news to the values of the school.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
“A Day in the Life of the Dean of Men,”<\/a> Green Goat, fall 1956. Vol 03, no 02. Football issue<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Whether intentionally or unintentionally, gatekeeping frames consumer opinions by choosing what news to include and how it is presented. Gatekeeping, coined by Kurt Lewin in 1943 and developed further by David Manning White, refers to journalists as gatekeepers of information, choosing what to report on and share with the public. Framing<\/a> refers to the way information is worded when it is shared and shapes the public\u2019s opinion on a matter with word choices. The language used, and information chosen in the Green Goat<\/em>, compared to the language and information used in The Post<\/em> or other University-sponsored news organizations, framed different opinions of the news consumers on the same topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Green Goat<\/em> would often publish stories that exemplified humorous or negative opinions on topics regarding Ohio University. Other newspapers at the time, such as The Post<\/em> or Green and White<\/em>, did not report on these topics and would often stick to the more common news-related stories. One of the Green Goat<\/em>\u2019s publications included a section that compared the Dean of Men to Adolf Hitler<\/a>. There were many pictures of Hitler and of Nazis that were used to exemplify the negative characteristics of the dean of men. Another publication included a section that addressed a teacher as Terrible Tom<\/a>. A series of pictures were published of \u201cTom\u201d with excerpts under each picture detailing how difficult and confusing Professor \u201cTom\u201d and his class were. While they did enjoy his class, it was mentioned that \u201cone out of every two will fail\u201d (Green Goat<\/em>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n
“Classes with Terrible Tom,”<\/a> Green Goat spring 1957, Vol 03, no 05, Senior issue.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n


Sourcing<\/a> refers to the process of gathering information, quotes and insights from different individuals or documents to support a news story or article. The Green Goat<\/em> primarily sourced events and opinions from the student body. \u201cNearly all of the copy and a majority of the art was produced by a student contributor\u201d (The Post<\/em>)<\/a>. As a student humor publication, the magazine’s themes and topics reflected campus culture, student life and broader social or cultural issues, often with a satirical or comedic twist. Occasionally, the publication would incorporate outside sources to strengthen its message. For example, in one edition, the Green Goat<\/em> criticized the university for becoming more restrictive, granting the administration more control than the student council. This critique stemmed from a situation where the student council had suggested closing the university for a few days due to the “worst outbreak of the flu in O.U.’s history.” Despite 60% of students being sick, the assistant to the principal refused the request, stating that the university would only close if 40% of faculty members were also sick. In response, the Green Goat <\/em>suggested that the Campus Affair Counsel (C.A.C) adopt a similar organizational structure to that of Drake University, with 8 elected students and 7 chosen faculty, allowing students more autonomy in running their own affairs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sourcing and audience are closely connected because the sources used in a publication directly influence the way content resonates with its intended readers. In the case of the Green Goat, the publication\u2019s sources, primarily students and events relevant to Ohio University, help shape content that appeals to the student body. By sourcing opinions and experiences from the student population, the Green Goat ensures its topics, tone and humor align with the interests and concerns of its readers. This creates a sense of relatability and authenticity that strengthens the connection between the publication and its audience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For instance, when the Green Goat critiques university policies or highlights campus issues, the sources, often drawn from student perspectives or events, make the publication feel like a reflection of student concerns. The use of student voices as sources ensures that the content speaks directly to the student body, making it more engaging and relevant. The choice of sources also informs the publication’s tone, with humor, satire, or critiques likely to resonate with students who share similar experiences or views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Green Goat exemplifies the psychological phenomenon of priming. Priming is how someone\u2019s response to a stimulus is affected by a previous stimulus. Harvard professor Daniel L. Schacter describes priming<\/a> as a non-declarative memory, saying it is \u201ca nonconscious influence of past experience on current performance or behavior.\u201d For the audience of the Green Goat, being exposed to the opinions of the writers of the Green Goat and reading the often critical reactions to how the school was operating primed the audience to think also think critically about the school.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Green Goat<\/em> also branded themselves as a scandalous, critical and humorous publication. Branding themselves as having these aspects in their magazine and putting a publication in a specific category primes the audience to expect a certain kind of content every time they pick up a magazine to read. The Green Goat<\/em> primed its readers to expect atypical school news in their publication by branding themselves as an atypical school news organization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
“Lippsie’s Believe It or Not!”<\/a> cartoon from Green Goat, spring 1957. Vol 03, no 05. Senior issue<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Future researchers will want to consider that as students came and went, the quality of the publications fluctuated. From the first publication in 1913 to the last in 1961, the Green Goat was not consistently running throughout these dates. Outside of the occasional report from outside newspapers like The Post or Green and White, there are few secondary sources or opinions on the publication. Additionally, student editors were being suspended due to the nature of the Green Goat. To continue the publication, editors were permanently removed from the publication, and they were required to create less \u201cobscene articles\u201d (The Post)<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

References<\/h2>\n\n\n\n