Search

Jessica Wills
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Excerpt: Faculty members at the University of Pennsylvania are concerned that free expression and viewpoint diversity may disappear completely from their university.  After a tense congressional hearing in which then-President Liz Magill said the university would not punish many forms of constitutionally protected speech — including anti-Semitic speech — Magill backtracked the next day via a video apology in which she signaled her willingness to abandon constitutional standards for free speech. Shortly afterward, she resigned.

In the wake of this shakeup, the future of free speech at Penn is far from certain. Others, however, would like to see the school revive its commitment to free speech. In that spirit, some faculty members drafted a “New Constitution for the University of Pennsylvania,” a vision for the university which calls Penn to recommit itself to intellectual diversity, institutional neutrality, and open discourse.

Joshua Katz
City Journal

Excerpt: “This year I gave only $1 to Brown.” Last week, three people said this to me.  Well, to be exact, one said, “only $10 to Princeton” and another “only $100 to Harvard.” But you get the idea. All three have given millions to these institutions in the past. All three are infuriated by what is happening on campuses across the country. All three sought my approval for their pointedly small gifts.

They do not have my approval. The amount of money they should give is zero. Not $1, like Harvard alumna Tally Zingher, who plans to join “hundreds of other former students in a symbolic protest,” but $0. I made this argument last December, and reiterate it now at the end of a year in which public confidence in higher education understandably has hit a new low.

Academe Blog

Excerpt: In recent months, trustees, donors, lobbying organizations, and members of Congress have repeatedly misrepresented the words and deeds of Penn faculty and students who have expressed concern for Palestinian civilians and criticized the war in Gaza, going so far as to suggest that faculty who have publicly condemned Hamas were Hamas supporters and that groups protesting genocide were calling for genocide.

These distortions and attacks on our colleagues have not addressed the scourge of antisemitism—a real and grave problem. Instead, they have threatened the ability of faculty and students to research, teach, study, and publicly discuss the history, politics, and cultures of Israel and Palestine. These attacks strike at the heart of the mission of an educational institution: to foster open, critical, and rigorous research and teaching that can produce knowledge for the public good in a democratic society.

Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: A free expression group is criticizing the university it ranked No. 1 nationally for student free speech after that same university allegedly punished a professor for using his own speech to criticize a student demonstration.

Carl Blair, a teaching professor in Michigan Technological University’s social sciences department, says Michigan Tech removed him from teaching one of his classes and barred him from contacting students enrolled in it. The public university allegedly did this last month after a national conservative group with campus chapters posted online an audio clip of him during a class, purportedly calling members of that group homophobic, dumb and racist.

Kathryn Palmer
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: A documentary about two young Jewish Americans who question their loyalty to Israel after traveling to the country and the West Bank has become a flash point in the academic freedom debates consuming some college campuses amid the Israel-Hamas war.

The award-winning film, Israelism, debuted at a film festival earlier this year and more than 60 screenings of it were planned—many on college campuses—across the country this fall and winter. Most of the screenings so far have happened without incident, but at Hunter College in New York and the University of Pennsylvania, the documentary has been the source of controversy over the past month.

Donie O'Sullivan and Clare Duffy
CNN

Excerpt: A nationally recognized online disinformation researcher has accused Harvard University of shutting down the project she led to protect its relationship with mega-donor and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

The allegations, made by Dr. Joan Donovan, raise questions about the influence the tech giant might have over seemingly independent research. Facebook’s parent company Meta has long sought to defend itself against research that implicates it in harming society: from the proliferation of election disinformation to creating addictive habits in children. Details of the disclosure were first reported by The Washington Post.

This article by PFS co-founder Stuart Taylor, Jr. recounts the controversy surrounding the Witherspoon statue located on Firestone Plaza. The attempted cancellation of Witherspoon and what it means for academic freedom at Princeton has been a focus of our attention, as you can see in our just-published Annual Report HERE. If you like what we are doing, please consider a year-end donation to PFS HERE.  

 The University’s official proceedings on the petition by assorted students and faculty members to remove from its prominent setting on Firestone Plaza the bronze statue of Princeton’s greatest president, John Witherspoon, are looking bleak for the statue, for the memory of Witherspoon, and perhaps also that of other founders of the United States.

 The second and apparently final symposium on the statue, held on November 3 by the University’s Committee on Naming, was notable for the absence of any unambiguous statement by any of the five invited speakers or by the moderator, Associate Professor Beth Lew-Williams, that the statue should be left standing undisturbed where it was placed in 2001, with the strong support of respected then-President Harold Shapiro.

John K. Wilson
Academe Blog

Excerpt: It’s always distressing during contentious times when neutral statements for free speech are twisted beyond recognition with false smears of bias and bigotry. In a November 27 essay in The Hill, Northwestern law professor Steven Lubet denounced the American Association of University Professors for a November 15 statement, “Polarizing Times Demand Robust Academic Freedom,” claiming that it has “a distressing anti-Israel bias.” I don’t work for the AAUP, and I don’t speak for the AAUP, but I think Lubet’s charge is completely incorrect and unsupported by any evidence.

Mark Bernstein ’83
Princeton Alumni Weekly

Excerpt: All in all, campus tension has been as high in recent weeks as it has been in several years. Furthermore, not in recent memory has a political issue so publicly and vocally divided the student body. On a campus that leans heavily toward the political left, fractures have emerged between people who until recently considered themselves progressive allies, only to find that, on this issue, they are bitterly divided.

And yet. It may be grading on a curve, but at least as of mid-November when this issue went to print, Princeton had avoided the uglier incidents that had taken place at other schools.

Bret Stephens
New York Times

Excerpt: There used to be a sign (which, for all I know, is still there) somewhere in the C.I.A.’s headquarters that read, “Every day is Sept. 12.” It was placed there to remind the agency’s staffers that what they felt right after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — the sense of outrage and purpose, of favoring initiative over caution, of taking nothing for granted — had to be the mind-set with which they arrived to work every day.

Darius Gross
Princeton Tory

Excerpt: On Friday, November 3, the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) Committee on Naming held a symposium entitled “Monuments, Memory, and the John Witherspoon Statue.” According to a poster advertising the event, it was held to “explore memorialization, monuments in American art history, and the university campus as a space and a community” in relation to the ongoing debate surrounding a campus statue of John Witherspoon, the University’s sixth president and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. The statue has lately been the subject of controversy, given Witherspoon’s participation in slavery. During the event, many of the invited speakers raised the possibility of removing or replacing the Witherspoon statue, which currently stands in Firestone Plaza.

Nicole Goodkind
CNN

Excerpt: Harvard University, like many campuses across America, continues to struggle in its contention with hate speech, protests and unrest over the Israel-Hamas war. One of its most prominent donors said Harvard needs to take urgent action to fix the problem, or it could risk a massive donor exodus.

Billionaire hedge fund CEO Bill Ackman called on Harvard to take steps to tackle a rise in “blatant antisemitism” and “anti-Israel attacks” on campus. Ackman, who received his undergraduate degree and MBA from Harvard, added that the failure to take action would put “important sources of Harvard’s revenues” at risk.

Victoria Davies and Lia Opperman
Daily Princetonian

Amid the ongoing conflict in Israel and Palestine, political speech has been in the spotlight on campus. University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 spoke with “Bloomberg Markets: The Close” on Oct. 10 about protecting free speech on campus in light of the war. He referenced an orientation module that first-years complete about respecting free speech and engaging in civil dialogue.

ACLU

Excerpt: In an open letter delivered to over 650 college and university leaders, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) expressed its strong opposition to any efforts to stifle free speech and association on college campuses, and urged universities to reject calls to investigate, disband, or penalize pro-Palestinian student groups for exercising their free speech rights. The letter follows a call to universities to investigate Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapters for “material support for terrorism,” without citing any evidence of such support.

Where the Buck Stops: Christopher Eisgruber ’83, Leonard Milberg ’53, and how administrators and diversity bureaucrats undermined academic freedom and erased history.

By Leslie Spencer ’79

Leonard Milberg ’53 collects rare things of scholarly import.  In his 30th reunion book entry, he says, “I have belatedly, but passionately discovered books, prints, and the Princeton University Rare Book Library.”  Over the years his expertise grew, as did his collections, which came to include 19th-century American prints and drawings, book collections of American poetry, Irish poetry, prose and theatre as well as two Judaica collections. Princeton is the lucky beneficiary of over 13,000 of these items, and over the decades Milberg has organized eleven exhibits at Princeton and paid for their accompanying publications. He often looked to Princeton faculty and other academics with relevant expertise to shape the content and provide context for these projects. And along the way he endowed two Princeton professorships. In short, Milberg has been for decades a devotee not only of history, literature, art and the knowledge one can derive from them, but also of Princeton. Over many decades his philanthropic endeavors have been completed without incident, and with immeasurable benefit to Princeton students and the wider community.

Tom Ginsburg
Persuasion

Excerpt: Campus free speech issues were already front and center in the national debate when the October 7th massacre in southern Israel unleashed a flood of new challenges. University leaders have become so accustomed to speaking out on issues of the day that there was no question that they had to speak out once again, but attempts to issue statements addressing the crisis only confused matters further.

This is a moment to reflect on what can and should be said at a moment like this, and on the underappreciated virtue of institutional silence. University leaders should treat it as an opportunity to reset the ship before the next crisis arises.

Twyla Colburn and Vitus Larrieu
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: After 25 years at Princeton, Keith Whittington, the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politics, announced that he is leaving Princeton to teach at Yale Law School at the end of this academic year.

Whittington describes himself as a “right of center” academic, a core value he upholds as important for bringing diversity to academic spaces. In an interview with The Daily Princetonian, Whittington says that a lack of conservative voices in academic spaces creates “stereotypes of what those views look like” which leads to increased political polarization. His move to Yale Law comes as the school has faced criticism from conservatives for fostering “cancel culture,” prompting Circuit Judges James Ho and Elizabeth Branch to boycott hiring clerks who graduate from Yale Law.

Evan Mandery
Politico

Excerpt: [Greg] Lukianoff’s philosophy — civil libertarianism — is arguably the very core of the American project. And yet it now faces intense threats from the left and the right, which Lukianoff chronicles in a new book on cancel culture. The book also offers some prescriptions, a new approach to politics and culture that could help bridge our poisonous divide, if given the chance.

Lukianoff doesn’t have all the answers, but as he recounted his own struggles with severe depression, it’s clear that his approach is a healing one. Whether Americans are willing to listen — and whether civil libertarianism can survive — is far less certain.

By Danielle Shapiro and Yonah Berenson
Wall Street Journal

Excerpt: As college campuses erupted in support of Hamas’s atrocities, many administrators responded equivocally. Often they took refuge in the principles of free speech and institutional neutrality, saying universities have no business taking positions on controversial issues. That would have been convincing if they had adhered to those principles before this month, but many didn’t. Officials often took strong positions on far less significant and more debatable issues. This politicization set the stage for the morally and intellectually bankrupt protests that have caused administrators such embarrassment.

Lauren Noble
National Review

Excerpt: Even at Yale, it is not every day that a faculty member expresses “solidarity” — and apparent glee — over the murder, rape, and kidnapping of civilians. So it did not go unnoticed when, as Israel was reeling from the deadliest terror attack in its history, associate professor Zareena Grewal proclaimed on X that “Palestinians have every right to resist through armed struggle” against a “genocidal settler state.” She also circulated a video of the onslaught captioned, “It’s been such an extraordinary day!”

Over 50,000 people subsequently signed a petition calling on Yale to fire Grewal for her support of terrorism. The university responded quickly, declining to discipline Grewal based on its commitment to freedom of speech. Anyone who has followed headlines about Yale over the past decade may be understandably surprised to learn that the university has such principles.

Yascha Mounk
Persuasion

Excerpt: On October 7th, the world witnessed the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. Many people, of all faiths and convictions, have recognized the enormity of these crimes. Numerous world leaders denounced the terrorist attacks in clear language. Private citizens shared their grief on social media. Millions mourned. But despite the outpouring of support, there has also been a large contingent of people and organizations who stayed uncharacteristically silent—or went so far as to celebrate the carnage.

Some of the most famous universities in the world—including Princeton, Yale and Stanford—only released statements after they came under intense pressure on social media.

Nathan Goetting
Discourse

Excerpt: The current academic free speech crisis stems from two causes. The first is that free speech principles are unnatural and counterintuitive. This has always been the case and, given human nature, always will be. The second, addressed in the next article in this series, is that now young people are exhorting—demanding, even—that older generations use a heavy censorial hand to promote social and political goals. This is unprecedented in our history and, without immediate and significant action, may prove ruinous to the mission of higher education.

Conor Friedersdorf
The Atlantic

Excerpt: Attacks on faculty rights are frequent in academia, where professors’ words are now policed by illiberal administrators, state legislators, and students. I’ve reported on related controversies in American higher education for more than 20 years. But I’ve never seen a policy that threatens academic freedom or First Amendment rights on a greater scale than what is now unfolding in this country’s largest system of higher education: California’s community colleges.

Frustratingly––even tragically––the same system is implementing new DEI rules, mandated by state bureaucrats, that trample on free speech while coercing faculty members on how to teach their subjects, which scholarly conclusions to reach, and even what political positions to advocate. Some faculty members say they feel like they must choose between their job and their conscience.

The University of Minnesota-Twin Cities AAUP Chapter
Academe Blog

Excerpt: The University of Minnesota-Twin Cities chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) deplores Hamline University leadership’s continued misrepresentation of its 2022 violation of the principle of academic freedom.  

Unfortunately, Hamline administrators have failed to learn from their mishandling of this case; rather than recommit to the principle of academic freedom, they have affirmed their disregard for it.

Maggie Hicks
Chronicle of Higher Education

Excerpt: On Tuesday afternoon a bright-red graphic popped up on a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill student group’s Instagram page. The post, by the campus’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, advertised a “Day of Resistance” protest on Thursday. Behind bold, capital lettering, a group of cartoon protesters held up peace signs and posters. A silhouette of a paraglider flew above.

Similar images appeared on several other organizations’ pages throughout the day next to statements reflecting the same sentiment — that deadly attacks by the Hamas militant group in Israel over the weekend had been justified and a direct result of the Israeli government’s oppression of people in occupied Palestinian territory. Those statements have been met with fierce criticism on social media calling on colleges to denounce the groups.

Eli Meyerhoff and Isaac Kamola
Academe Blog

Excerpt: Today, attacks on academic freedom originate from state houses, governors’ offices, partisan political organizations, think tanks, and online trolls. This multi-pronged attack on academic freedom requires a mass political—rather than a merely individual, institutional, or procedural—response.

We question whether the language of academic freedom provides the strongest framework for a successful mass defense against this political onslaught. We suggest that an alternative, complementary principle, “freedom to learn,” offers a more widely resonant rallying cry.

Jonathan Turley
Jonathan Turley’s Blog

Excerpt: Universities and colleges across the country have become embroiled in a debate over free speech in the aftermath of the massacre of Israelis by Hamas terrorists this week. Various student groups have expressed support for Hamas or their cause while condemning Israel. Black Lives Matter (BLM) chapters have even shown the image below of one of the terrorists who paraglided into Israel where hundreds of civilians were murdered, including babies.

Harvard has been a particular flashpoint over strident statements of condemnation of Israel immediately after the attack. The support has led to at least one firm rescinding an offer to a pro-Palestinian NYU law student as well as calls for universities to cut off support for student groups condemning Israel.

Bryan Paul
Washington Examiner

Excerpt: When thinking of college alumni, one generally imagines boosters donning their alma mater’s signature colors and cheering proudly for their team at homecoming games, or a multimillionaire being courted at campus events and donating substantial sums to fund an institution’s new building, sports complex, or scholarship program.

University of Chicago News

Excerpt: At a time when many state governments are enacting or considering restrictions on what can be taught at public universities, a new survey developed by AP-NORC and the University of Chicago shows that large majorities of Americans oppose such restrictions and support many essential aspects of academic freedom in universities.

Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed

Excerpt: At the American Anthropological Association’s major annual meeting next month, five women from four countries were set to discuss gender and sex—and to criticize other academics’ views on these topics.

They titled this serious session something cheeky, with a Salt-N-Pepa song reference: “Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby: Why biological sex remains a necessary analytic category in anthropology.” The association’s executive board has now canceled the panel, releasing a statement Thursday titled “No Place For Transphobia in Anthropology.” Ramona Perez, the association’s president, explained that after the preliminary program was published online Aug. 1, showing the panelists’ names, anthropologists from multiple fields raised concern.

Kristen Shahverdian, Samantha LaFrance
PEN America

Excerpt: Earlier this month, when disability activist Alice Wong submitted her remarks for a virtual talk at Boston University’s School of Public Health, the school made an unusual request: to change what she planned to say.

Because she cannot speak, Wong requires questions in advance of public appearances. This allows her to type answers ahead of time to more efficiently use a text-to-speech app. Days before the scheduled talk, a school official wrote to Wong, asking that she change “F U Dr. Fauci” to “I disagree with Dr. Fauci” and to remove the names of the other officials. In doing so, the school inadvertently transformed a simple accessibility request into an opportunity to muffle the activist’s speech.

Matthew Wilson and Alba Bajri
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: To the Editor:

On Sept. 17, The Daily Princetonian published an article by Aidan Gouley ’27 entitled “Princetonians must invest in the marketplace of ideas.” The author calls on students to “situat[e] free expression in a liberal context,” claiming that “the debate on free expression at Princeton has been co-opted by campus conservatives” while slandering principled and nonpartisan free speech advocacy as “toxic and polarizing.”

Gouley’s allegation that conservative students have “co-opted” the free speech debate is an oft-regurgitated and thoroughly debunked trope. Articles leveling the same meritless argument have a lengthy history of appearing in the pages of this publication — and have been amply refuted. Gouley calls on students “to create an environment of learning for all in the natural exchange of individual ideas and experiences that both includes and simultaneously transcends the political.” But absentminded complaining about the co-option of the free speech issue by conservative students — the so-called “ideologues” making “overbroad claims about the ideological slant of the University” — does not help “bridge the political divide,” nor does it promote the free exchange of ideas.

Gouley’s assertion that “Princeton hardly feels like an institution where free speech is directly under attack” betrays a painful lack of awareness of the real problems facing our University.

Foundation for Individual Rights in Expression Email to subscribers

Excerpt: Despite Harvard’s reputation for excellent scholarship, the university has consistently failed to meet standards in one area: free speech.

According to FIRE’s 2024 College Free Speech Rankings, Harvard University ranked dead last at 248 out of 248 institutions. Students reported their discomfort expressing ideas, lack of confidence in the administration’s support for speech, and acceptance of students shouting down speakers.

Christopher Eisgruber
Office of the President, Princeton University

Excerpt: Given the importance of academic freedom to what we do, I wanted to begin the year by reaffirming this University’s steadfast support for it.  I say this now because it has unfortunately become common for university faculty members here and elsewhere to become the target of viral social media storms focused on controversial materials that they assign or teach.  That has sometimes extended to demands that the University should ban or condemn a book, cancel a course, or discipline a professor.

We of course will not do that.  Academic freedom protects your right to decide what to teach and how to teach it.  That right, like the right to free speech on campus, is very broad indeed, and we will protect it.

Emma Camp
Reason Magazine
 
Excerpt: According to a new survey, only one-third of college students say it's never acceptable to shout down a controversial campus speaker. And one-quarter think using violence can be acceptable in at least some circumstances to stop someone from speaking on campus.

The highest-ranked schools consistently had "green" speech code ratings—a measure FIRE uses to indicate that a school's official policies do not trample student and faculty First Amendment rights—and administrations that consistently defended controversial speech. However, many of these same schools seem to have student bodies that aren't quite so tolerant.

Stanford Alumni for Free Speech and Critical Thinking Newsletter

Excerpt: One of our readers forwarded to us Cornell President Martha E. Pollack’s letter last week welcoming students and faculty back to campus. The letter focuses on the issues of freedom of expression and critical thinking in ways we would hope Stanford’s new leadership can similarly express and then implement this coming academic year. The text of the entire letter is posted at our website.

All indications are that this coming academic year will see a robust discussion nationwide, both on and off campus, about the importance of free speech and academic freedom at our U.S. colleges and universities and, if any restrictions are to be imposed, who gets to decide and why?

Debra Satz and Dan Edelstein
New York Times

Excerpt: Free speech is once again a flashpoint on college campuses. This year has seen at least 20 instances in which students or faculty members attempted to rescind invitations or to silence speakers. In March, law school students at our own institution made national news when they shouted down a conservative federal judge, Kyle Duncan. And by signing legislation that undermines academic freedom in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis is carrying out what is effectively a broad assault against higher education.

We believe that this intolerance of ideas is not just a consequence of an increasingly polarized society. We think it also results from the failure of higher education to provide students with the kind of shared intellectual framework that we call “civic education.”

Eric Kelderman
Chronicle of Higher Education

Excerpt: Americans today believe in the value of a college credential, but they aren’t convinced higher education is fulfilling its promise to society.

That ambivalence toward colleges — general support with some real caveats — infused responses to a national poll by The Chronicle to gauge public perceptions of higher education. The goal was to probe attitudes about the value of a degree and, beyond educating individual students, institutions’ broader activities and goals. This is the first of several stories that will explore the poll’s findings and the issues they raise.

Lori Lowenthal Marcus
Jewish Journal

Excerpt: “Wokeness” and cancel culture operate in reverse when it comes to the Jews. For all other minorities, the Woke Police eagerly sniff out barely perceptible (or non-existent) “harm” caused by a teacher’s stray phrase in a classroom, an actor’s comments, an author’s opinion, or a physician’s approval of biological facts.

But then there are statements about Jews. For these, even the most outrageous and wildly unfounded assertions about Jews and/or the Jewish State are not only permitted to be uttered but also tweeted and retweeted, expounded upon and, most significantly, taught as truth in classrooms.

Denise Valenti
Princeton Office of Communications

Excerpt: Anthony Romero was once a Princeton undergraduate struggling with how to confront hurtful speech he experienced on campus. Today, as executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, he zealously defends Americans’ right to use that same kind of speech.

Romero traced his journey during an Orientation event on Tuesday for first-year students where he joined President Christopher L. Eisgruber to explore the importance of academic freedom and free expression on campus. The event marked the second consecutive year Eisgruber has led an Orientation session on the topic.

Bill Hewitt ‘74
Tiger Roars, Substack

Excerpt: As I have noted elsewhere, the [Princeton & Slavery] Project is the “Flying Dutchman of Princeton” – a ghost ship that haunts Princeton with profound misinformation that defames Witherspoon and misleads the debate over the University’s statue honoring him.  

In her 2019 Thrive presentation, Prof. Sandweiss observed, “Now a project like ours requires scrupulous attention to accuracy.  As I told my students again and again, one mistake can make people doubt everything we’re doing.”  Why the Project erred so badly with its Witherspoon essay and why it has refused even to acknowledge – much less correct – its numerous mistakes therein are important questions for which the Princeton community deserves answers.

Eric Rasmusen, Indiana University professor

Excerpt: Suppose a university has an online form where anyone can report something a student says in private conversation and the report goes into a special surveillance software database that the university bought from the Maxient company for that purpose. A Bias Response Team receives notice of the report, and sees that it is political speech protected by the First Amendment. The Team leaves the report in the student’s file, and asks the student to come to a voluntary meeting. Virginia Tech’s policy in a case like this was to: Invite them to engage in a voluntary conversation. . . . If a student fails to respond to this message, or declines to meet with our office, no further action is taken and the student faces no consequences of any kind.

Would such a bias response apparatus chill speech at the university? Speech First and three circuits say yes; Virginia Tech (Sands) and two circuits say no. Surveillance software is part of that, since they are what bias response teams rely upon, including the BIRT’s at Virginia Tech. Speech First’s cert petition [for Supreme Court review] says, “Precisely because speech codes are often struck down, universities have looked for subtler, more sophisticated ways to chill ‘offensive’ speech.”

Press Release
Cornell Free Speech Alliance

Today, the Cornell Free Speech Alliance, a nonprofit and nonpartisan coalition of Cornell alumni, faculty, and students, sent a report featuring 20 policy recommendations to Cornell University leaders intended to restore open inquiry and academic freedom on campus. The recommendations are the culmination of nearly two years of research and dialogue that began in response to an increasingly degraded free speech environment at the University. The transmittal of the recommendations coincides with the beginning of Cornell’s free expression themed 2023-2024 academic year, which many consider to be an empty and insincere attempt by university leaders to deflect pressure over free speech concerns.

Alex Morey
Persuasion

Excerpt: Joy Alonzo wants to stop fentanyl overdose deaths. As a professor at the Texas A&M College of Pharmacy and co-chair of the school’s Opioid Task Force, she advocates for her views inside and outside of class.

Doing so in one of her classes earlier this semester almost cost Alonzo her job.

Jill Filipovic
The Atlantic

Excerpt: In 2008, when I was a writer for the blog Feministe, commenters began requesting warnings at the top of posts discussing distressing topics, most commonly sexual assault. Violence is, unfortunately and inevitably, central to feminist writing. Rape, domestic violence, racist violence, misogyny—these events indelibly shape women’s lives, whether we experience them directly or adjust our behavior in fear of them.

We thought we were making the world just a little bit better. It didn’t occur to me until much later that we might have been part of the problem.

Oliver Milman
The Guardian

Excerpt: Videos that compare climate activists to Nazis, portray solar and wind energy as environmentally ruinous and claim that current global heating is part of natural long-term cycles will be made available to young schoolchildren in Florida, after the state approved their use in its public school curriculum.

Heterodox Academy

Excerpt: University orientation programs are foundational to the new student experience on campus. These programs cover helpful logistics of campus life and operations and, importantly, they also set the stage for the student experience, intellectual values, and social life. But how should orientation programs be structured to ensure that HxA values of open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement are instilled at the outset?

During this discussion, our panel of experts will discuss what student orientations need to cover, what they cover out of choice, and what they should cover.