Join a discussion about this article HERE.

By: Jaclyn Chen <[email protected]>

The first lesson journalists learn is don’t create the news. That fundamental rule was nearly violated in the last few weeks when Carmel made national news regarding breathalyzers at football games.

Case in point: MSNBC aired a segment about breathalyzers at football games – with an over-the-phone interview with Principal John Williams – and USA Today wrote a blurb about the breathalyzers in its “Sports Update.”

Both segments suggested that the procedure, which began two years ago at school dances, has recently stirred up controversy at this school, and that simply is not true.

To most students here, the reality about breathalyzers sunk in a long time ago – administrators have yet to catch anyone this year, and blowing into the hand-held apparatus is just part of the procedure at school-sponsored dances and athletic events. Most students are apathetic, a few grudgingly comply and almost no one has a serious problem with it.

As a member of the media, I find the hype surrounding this situation quite disturbing. The role of the reporter is to report the news, not to create it. Breathalyzers have been in place for two years already, so why report this now? The fact that this subject is old news muddies up the reasoning behind its mention in the first place.

The negative media attention, however, didn’t stop with just a mention. After footage of administrators breathalyzing Carmel students before the Homecoming game, the next roll of tape showed random drunken teenagers stumbling across streets, pitchers of beer at parties and even old men in bars drinking alcohol.

To air that footage is to imply that those types of activities happen here on campus, and that is untrue. To its credit, MSNBC later replaced the second roll with other footage of high school football games.

At Carmel, the point of the breathalyzer is not to catch anyone but rather to act as a deterrent for drinking. The school cannot patrol students’ activities when they are elsewhere, but the two options for school-sponsored activities are quite clear: drink and leave or don’t drink and stay. The rule is self-explanatory and plain to students, so again, what is all this hype about?

The recent attention also irresponsibly concerns parents and other adults that there may be a drinking problem on campus at school activities. This column does not attest to what happens after school is out, but drinking at school activities is a rare occurrence. The hype surrounding breathalyzers, however, sets off alarms in the wrong direction and will create more controversy than what originally existed.

Perhaps critics are now more vocal; Ken Falk of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Indiana has been recently quoted in numerous articles about breathalyzers at Carmel, including the blurb in USA Today.
Falk said that breathalyzing is a possible violation of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. Because the Carmel police is on site, the ACLU has stated in interviews that the potential arrest would stem from an “unreasonable” search, and that attending a football game does not equate to probable cause necessary to conduct a police search.

This criticism depends on how the word “unreasonable” is interpreted. The school obviously prohibits drugs and alcohol, so it takes proactive measures instead of reactive.

Regardless, the administration has an obligation to all students to ensure that its events are drug- and alcohol-free, and that responsibility is not up for interpretation.

Complex constitutional interpretations aside, the fact of the matter is that breathalyzers have worked thus far. As they should, they’ve deterred anyone from going to the games under the influence.

Perhaps there would be more student uproar if someone were caught and punished, but until then, the breathalyzers have functioned as prescribed. If the media wants to create hype for their use, Carmel is not the place to look.