Princetonians for Free Speech

Earlier this month, my colleague Isaac Barsoum penned a column questioning why Princeton’s recording policy was not in Rights, Rules, Responsibilities — which Princeton calls “a concise reference and guide” for all University policy. After the column was published, the policy was added to RRR. This response — if belated, and certainly appearing a bit sheepish — would seem to resemble a win for advocates of University transparency.

There is nothing wrong with admitting that Charlie Kirk was controversial. I disagreed with some of his beliefs, just as I disagree with plenty of other political figures. People should be able to criticize his arguments, rhetoric, and politics as strongly as they want. The reaction to his death, however, involved more than mere criticism.

Taken together, these examples show how quickly political violence can become political entertainment. A man who was killed while expressing his political beliefs became a costume, sound effect, and dance trend. Once someone becomes a political symbol, it becomes remarkably easy to dismiss their personhood.

My 40-year career has been focused on joyously and avidly preparing, interviewing, counseling, and placing college grads from across the US into their best possible first jobs. Seeing a grad land a role that will challenge and inspire them is my passion. Things went great for the first 25 years of my career–I went around the US finding fabulous kids who hungered for the best opportunity to launch their career and follow their passion. 

Starting around 2015, however, I first noticed a shift in capability and engagement in a growing  percentage of the seniors with whom I interacted. By 2020, job retention among those hired in  ensuing years was dramatically declining.

In fall 2025, Cornell University Provost Kavita Bala convened the Committee on the Future of the American University to consider the current course and future direction of higher education over the next half century. The committee, composed of 18 faculty drawn from across disciplines, was charged with examining the disruptive forces confronting higher education. 

They were asked to envision how Cornell should adapt its core missions of undergraduate education, research and scholarship, public impact and community engagement, and graduate and professional education to meet the disruptions of the current moment by looking decades into the future. The charge was deliberately ambitious. They were not asked to defend the university as it is, but to imagine what it could become.

Soon after college students across the country set up encampments to protest the war in Gaza in 2024, many institutions revised or implemented new policies that restricted the time, place and manner in which students can protest. Two years later, some universities are revisiting their policies as a new crop of students critique the restrictions.