{"id":2173,"date":"2017-02-11T07:23:40","date_gmt":"2017-02-11T15:23:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/?p=2173"},"modified":"2017-02-11T07:23:40","modified_gmt":"2017-02-11T15:23:40","slug":"ideas-and-free-speech-on-campus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2017\/02\/ideas-and-free-speech-on-campus\/","title":{"rendered":"Ideas, and free speech, on campus"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"order\"<\/a>I was once a censor. Years ago, I was Dean of the school of fine arts on a Canadian university campus. The school had a degree program in film production, a somewhat free-wheeling operation. One day a parent of a twelve-year old phoned me, to say she had found in her son’s room a script of a student film in which her boy had been invited to play a minor role. She was appalled by what she saw, and forwarded me a copy. The script, in addition to many problems, not the least of them the legality of involving a minor, was also viciously misogynistic. I spoke with the film professor, who had in fact seen the script and was willing to let it go ahead into production, although he admitted it was of quite low quality. In a program for which there had already been discussion of the poor environment for the minority of film production students who were women, I brought the production to a halt, and ordered that the student produce something more appropriate. In the end, the student, who was not entirely without talent, produced a film that had a satirical take on me. Which was fine; if you cannot handle satirical criticisms, university administration is not a wise career choice.<\/p>\n

What to allow or not allow on campus is not an easy call. The borders are foggy and gray. I don’t find much value in slippery-slope arguments, whether ‘but if you don’t allow this<\/em>, will you next ban that<\/em>?’ or ‘but if you allow that<\/em>, are you then going to allow this<\/em>?’ One of the very first things novice skiers learn is how to stop themselves on a slippery slope, and I think we are all capable of that too. It’s also important to remember that all institutions have formal or informal guidelines on expression as a means of protecting the mission of the organization itself. Last week Senator Elizabeth Warren was prevented from speaking when her reading aloud a letter critical of a Cabinet nominee was ruled out of order. I’m not sure that was a wise call, but our chambers of democratic debate must retain some guidelines if they are to function. Parliamentary systems allow for many creative means of insulting members of the opposing party, but insinuating an opponent is dishonorable, for example using the word “liar”, is out of order. And a good thing too – rules of debate allow a space for substantive debate to occur. As Jacob Levy has pointed out<\/a>, our university disciplines<\/em> are in fact a means of limiting debate within certain bounds such that discussion and advancement of ideas might move forward (I highly recommend reading his talk).<\/p>\n

So what can guide us on the 2017 campus? What speech is in bounds and what is out? Was my act as a censor wrong?<\/p>\n

I don’t think it was. Students come to our campuses to learn, and that learning involves having preconceived ideas challenged and tested. If there is speech or expression that in no conceivable way advances that goal, and is in fact harmful to it, it’s not clear why it ought to be a part of university life. I censored a film because it was a male student having a bit of a lark with the department’s cameras while at the same time creating a hostile environment for women students to study the craft of filmmaking. It was not presenting “ideas”. It was simply designed to insult.<\/p>\n

And similarly with the current controversies over outside speakers invited to campus. In last week’s Chronicle of Higher Education<\/em>, Rafael Walker considers the case<\/a> of Williams College disallowing speaker John Derbyshire:<\/p>\n

A provocative student group wanted to bring the conservative writer John Derbyshire to campus, not because all its members supported his views but because at least some of them planned to refute those views. However, they should have taken a moment to anticipate the kind of press to which the event, as planned, would have inevitably given rise: “Williams to Host Notorious Racist” is not a headline that any college president wants to find himself having to explain to alumni.<\/p>\n

Canceling the speech, however, was a missed teaching opportunity for the leaders at Williams. The students\u2019 idealistic hearts were in the right place: They aimed to get all the ideas out in the open, in the hope that, in Darwinian fashion, only the fittest would survive. But their approach was way off. This was fundamentally a framing issue that faculty and administrators should have worked with students to overcome rather than dismissing the proposal out of hand.<\/p>\n

No, it would not have done for a student group to bring a speaker of Derbyshire\u2019s stature with the intent to engage him on their own. No matter how intelligent Williams\u2019s student body is, this simply wouldn\u2019t have been a fair fight. Surely a less objectionable alternative would have been to stage the event as a debate rather than a lecture; in so doing, the students might have brought in any number of pundits from the swelled ranks of the liberal intelligentsia to oppose Derbyshire\u2019s message.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Derbyshire’s “ideas” are that black students are on average intellectually genetically inferior to white students. Here’s a flavor<\/a> of what he has to say. What is there to debate here? He calls himself a racist, and it is on that basis that he was invited to campus (and let’s not say this is a banning of a “conservative” view. Conservatives are conservatives; racists are racists). What African-American student, at Williams to study Chemistry, ought to be in an environment where the campus sees fit to debate whether she is of inferior genetic provenance?<\/p>\n

Students should be exposed to different ideas. The mainstream discipline of Economics might hold Post-Keynesian theory in low regard, but good for students to hear about it from someone who believes it. But that’s a debate about ideas, about what campuses are meant to be about. Speakers whose sole<\/em> goal is to insult, and who are invited purely on that basis … what is the goal? What does that further? Would the legislators who want to force campuses to admit such speakers<\/a> allow a free-for-all in their own legislative chambers? We know they don’t, and I don’t blame them.<\/p>\n

I’ll close on a frustratingly vague note. These are judgment calls. Any clear line that’s drawn will immediately bring hard cases. Reasonable people will disagree. But some times, in order to pursue its educational mission, to be enjoyed by all students, there will be prohibitions. No campus has ever been “anything goes”, and for good reason.<\/p>\n

Footnote: I’m going to make a point of making a statement that is always the case: I speak for myself here, not for the institution where I am employed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I was once a censor. Years ago, I was Dean of the school of fine arts on a Canadian university campus. The school had a degree program in film production, a somewhat free-wheeling operation. One day a parent of a twelve-year old phoned me, to say she had found in her son’s room a script […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":2179,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-2173","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-issues","8":"entry"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/David-Cameron-speaks-duri-012-848x445.jpg","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3dIW5-z3","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1320,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/06\/film-tax-credits-jobs-and-lost-incomes\/","url_meta":{"origin":2173,"position":0},"title":"Film tax credits, jobs, and lost incomes","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"June 2, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"This morning artsjournal.com links to yet another chapter in the endless series of different states, provinces and countries deciding how much in tax credits ought to be granted to commercial film and television production, because: jobs. I recently posted re Maryland here. Today, Hollywood Reporter, er, reports: the California Film\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/06\/the-last-picture-show-poster.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1067,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/02\/today-in-film-tax-credits\/","url_meta":{"origin":2173,"position":1},"title":"Today in film tax credits (Updated December 2, 2014)","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"February 21, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"It never ends: production companies asking for, and getting, tax credits for local production when the economic case is cloudy, to say the least. The Washington Post reports: A few weeks before\u00a0Season 2 of \u201cHouse of Cards\u201d\u00a0debuted online, the show\u2019s production company sent Maryland Gov. Martin O\u2019Malley\u00a0a letter with this\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"created six thousand jobs","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/Maryland-film-tax-credit.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":4659,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2026\/03\/reading-eleonora-redaellis-invisible-cultural-policy-in-america\/","url_meta":{"origin":2173,"position":2},"title":"Reading Eleonora Redaelli’s Invisible Cultural Policy in America","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"March 4, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"This recent book is open access,\u00a0here. And my full review in the\u00a0International Review of Public Policy\u00a0is also open access,\u00a0here. My review begins: There is an old joke: An American tourist is visiting Oxford for the first time, and on his first morning signs up for a guided walking tour. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/image.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1667,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/11\/arts-policy-and-the-election\/","url_meta":{"origin":2173,"position":3},"title":"Arts, policy, and the election (updated)","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"November 3, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Barry's Blog has a post on the consequences of the election, anticipating Republican gains in the House and likely control of the Senate, calling the post 'What Tomorrow's Election Means for the Nonprofit Arts.' Good question! He writes: On the federal level, if the Democrats maintain control of the Senate,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"what's the big deal?","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/11\/Voters.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":3801,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2025\/05\/children-of-men\/","url_meta":{"origin":2173,"position":4},"title":"Children of Men","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"May 3, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"At Indiana University each spring there is an arts festival in honor of Kurt Vonnegut,\u00a0Granfalloon. This year\u2019s theme is his novel\u00a0Cat\u2019s Cradle, which is the book where he introduces the term Granfalloon (although, to my mind, not really as something one would celebrate; Karass would have been a better choice\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1100,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/03\/the-sunk-cost-fallacy-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":2173,"position":5},"title":"the sunk cost fallacy","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"March 7, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"You've got to know when to fold 'em. Yesterday at Indiana University we hosted Peter Frumkin, who talked about his new book (co-authored with Ana Kolendo) Building for the Arts: The Strategic Design of Cultural Facilities. The book contains a range of case studies of significant building or renovation of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"sunk","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/sunk-titanic.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/sunk-titanic.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/sunk-titanic.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/sunk-titanic.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/03\/sunk-titanic.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2173","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2173"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2173\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2180,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2173\/revisions\/2180"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2179"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2173"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2173"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2173"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}