By Gunslinger

How much is too much?

You know, at some point in this unnecessarily eventful, dramatic school year that was kicked off with a list of people to not talk to, it’s intrinsic that eventually, the Ateneo High School (AHS) Freedom wall is discussed. Because of course, where else is the best place to solve personal problems with other people than publicly, online, and with an anonymous identity? While the idea of freedom has been debated on by countless philosophical geniuses, it seems as though in the AHS, people already have the answer — freedom is an outlet to destroy others.

It may not be considered as an involvement, nor is it classified as official under the Sanggunian, yet the AHS Freedom Wall carries the Ateneo name and more so, affects outside perceptions of its inner people. Under the guise of anonymity, the Freedom Wall serves as a looking glass where people, regardless of background or name; can speak up, be spoken to, and be heard. Over the years, it’s been an outlet for discussions, debates and the typical voicing-out-of-opinions, but it also begs the question – how much is too much?

Two Blades — The Issue Behind the Freedom Wall

When thinking of an appropriate simile to the FW, a double-edged sword, albeit its commonness and overuse, comes to mind the best. “The Freedom Wall is like a double-edged sword, acting as both a beacon  motivating and  inspiring and a wedge, splitting a community in half or worse — being the foundation for the collapse of an individual.” For a secret admirer or inspired individual, something like a freedom wall is a dream — a platform to literally express yourself without revealing your identity. Unfortunately, for a person who wants to create issues within the AHS society, the platform is also nightmare fuel — a way to destroy others while being shielded from its consequences. 

Something as complex and popular as a freedom wall should  be used for good purposes, but instead, it’s weaponized against a person. At the very least, it could be balanced, to be a venue to discuss issues like decent human beings, and a venue to voice out positive thoughts. 

Those who eagerly listened to the principal’s welcoming speech at the start of the school year would know that the concept of the freedom wall was discussed, particularly its negative connotations and how it promulgates cancel culture. These indeed are valid points, given the recent issues with do-not-interact (DNI) lists, specific callouts wherein individuals are pinpointed, and hot takes meant to be what is called “rage bait,” essentially sparking outrage within a community for fun. 

Isn’t it ironic that an institution which prides itself on raising persons-for-and-with-others has students acting for themselves only? When this factor about the freedom wall is brought up, it’s literally impossible to think of any scenario where students posting entries actually do it for people other than themselves. Yet the page carries the Ateneo name.

So where do we draw the line? Is it now acceptable to wear a t-shirt with the Ateneo name and logo, then scream profanities at a public area? If not, what’s the difference between this and an online platform where the same thing is being done anyway?

What’s ironic is the fact that in the website where entries are submitted to be posted in the AHS FW page, there are a set of rules that users must follow in order for their entries to be uploaded on social media. Specifically, “Name Dropping or any of its equivalents (ex. naming a quality or a position that could only apply to one person) in an insulting or accusatory manner are unacceptable. However, criticism is still an essential part of the Wall! Posts criticizing institutions without the intent of harassment will be accepted.” Why, then, are people or their initials so infamous because of the freedom wall? 

The funny part about it is that the freedom wall has so much power. You’d think that with all the lessons, reflections and concepts about responsibility tackled within the AHS, people would learn to not swallow every bit of “information,” fed to them online — ironic. It isn’t an official organization, nor is it officially accredited by the school, yet it seems to reach more people than organizations trying to make positive differences in the community. After all, with an audience of 3.2 thousand likes and 4.8 thousand followers, it’s bound to reach people, inside and outside Ateneo. 

It has gotten to the point where this issue had to be mentioned in the principal’s opening speech for the school year. What a way to open the year! The worst part is that whatever the community was reminded to think about at that time was probably already forgotten. The mini-reflection about kindness and watching-your-words likely went in one ear and out the other — peoples’ initials, their specific positions and what they’re notorious for are stuck in the community’s heads more than any life-giving speech or lesson. To think, this platform has “rules.” Where?

It becomes even worse such that even teachers are targeted by the freedom wall. Why do people have time to berate teachers online, yet somehow cannot find time to schedule consultations? 

How many reputations have been ruined by the platform? How many more need to be ruined before we say enough?

Two Sides to a Story — Why It Should Stay Regardless

When a community is given a platform to express their deepest opinions, there comes a point when the fact that the said platform’s use for negativity rather than positivity comes into question. If you have the platform to intrepidly do good — why don’t you? 

It must be realized that the FW has a certain uniqueness to it — no other organization in the AHS allows for free, instant, direct speech with access to basically the entire community and even beyond like the freedom wall does. It serves as a way for ‘anon,’ or the unknown user behind the screen to speak to the entire community without fear of being judged or pinpointed. Yes, the page has its negatives, but people and organizations are also uplifted through it.

For example, there’s just a different kind of joy and fulfillment that senior org officers feel when there is positive feedback from attendees of their events through freedom walls. While interactions like this, where org officers are approached and given good feedback aren’t necessarily done in person, it suddenly becomes possible through the freedom wall. That’s the thing — good things can and do come from the freedom wall and the question of its viability should not be limited only to its downsides, but through what good it can do for the community as well.

Aside from the tugging-at-heartstrings part of it all, the freedom wall is a means for people to realize they’re not alone in their experiences in the ASHS. If you scroll through the freedom wall page, ignoring the negativity and questionable posts, it’s impossible to miss entries describing feelings of desolation and trepidation. “I’m new to the ASHS but I have no friends,” and statements of the like can be found along the steady stream of FW posts published everyday. What’s amazing is that for each entry, there are comments and “reactions” promoting encouragement and prompting anon to trust in the process and keep the faith. 

Things like this make you wonder — why doesn’t this happen more often?

A Source of Discourse and Digestion

While the two prior subsections detail the individual pros and cons of the freedom wall, it’s important to also explore its role in the discussion of opinions and public discourse within the ASHS. Please note — the rest of the subsection will tackle recent issues brought up in the freedom wall, and if for some reason, you might not be comfortable reading about it, you may skip ahead to the next subsection.

Obviously one of the most recent issues discoursed in the freedom wall is the “rightful,” victor of the Hataw Pinoy dance series, held during the culmination of the school’s Buwan ng Wika activities, dubbed Pinoytuntunan. The day itself concluded with HumSS bagging the victory, and that was that. From a spectator’s view in the event, banners of yellow waved in the air, “Husay, HumSS!” rang repeatedly in FLC’s walls and all the other strands were happy — not only for HumSS’ victory, but also for the hard work and dedication their own strand’s dancers put forward.

Cue the freedom wall.

All of a sudden, HumSS did not deserve their victory — it should have been another strand instead. It’s amazing how the paramount effort put into each dance was belittled by some “Atenean,” sitting behind a screen, thinking that invalidating other strands’ efforts was a good idea. Rather than appreciating the essence of school activities or actually being productive, certain people spent their time negating the work done by others instead. So, when the entire community could have celebrated the end of a long, ambition-driven Buwan ng Wika, it was instead caught up in a freedom wall debate about who should and shouldn’t have won. How childish.

Why couldn’t we all have just gone home in good spirits?

With viewpoints in the freedom wall posted from such an enigmatic, unique community, there are truly no right or wrong answers to certain open questions. It is worth noting, however, that there is a right and wrong way to put these answers. 

Moving Forward — What might be done better

It doesn’t take rocket science to understand what could and couldn’t be done better with the freedom wall. The equation is simple — the page has an administrator; not all opinions deserve to be posted; before posting, the administrator can screen the entries.

Truthfully, this subsection isn’t particularly purposed to throw vilification at the administrator — it has already been established that there is no room for that in the community. However, let this serve as a wake up call instead to the entire community. Watch what you say. 

For seniors, you’ve been handed down a safe space, a fresh start and a platform to truly shine by those who came before you. For juniors, you’ve been given the same thing. For the sake of those in your batch, those who came before you, and those who will come after you — keep it that way.

Opinions are opinions, but there are certain ways to phrase it that draws a fine line between a genuinely sensible, community-building opinion and a destructive afterthought that leaves the society reeling in disgust and anger. 

What you say reflects your batch, your unit, and your school. So, consider, for the benefit of all, do you say what you watch or watch what you say?