Academic Freedom in Crisis: Punishment, Political Discrimination, and Self-Censorship

[1NJParent]

I think the reason we have trouble establishing facts is because of social media and internet. It used to be the case that major media outlets have the resources and feel the need to defend their reputations by getting the facts right. Now, most of these outlets have a hard time competing with free, but often biased and unverified, sources of news, so they’ve cut back, retaining few reporters of their own to report news (often relying on third-party sources for information) and substituing news with opinions. Opinions resonate much better with their audiences who are predisposed to share such opinions. Their audiences are further influenced by such opinions and become even more opinionated. We run into a vicious cycle.

[woarble]

The thing is, all public and most private universities receive funds from the government (which is a way of saying from the taxpayers). These funds come in many ways directly and non-directly such as through subsidizing student loans/research grants etc. Since the representation of views in academia does not remotely reflect the current 50:50 split (approx) of the general tax paying population - is this reasonable? Should the school’s values reflect those of the funding population - at least in part? Should there be equal voices for discussion? Do you feel there is value in students at universities being exposed to diversity of thought? The resources even from highly regarded private universities do not come solely from tuition & endowments except in the case of 2-3 small conservative colleges (that I am aware of). The problem is that academia (in its current state) exists in an echo chamber, however the world is full of diverse opinions.

[Happytimes2001]

@woarble 1,000%

[Creekland]

@Happytimes2001

I didn’t see anyone in this thread mention any of these things. It still comes down to free speech. Are you willing to let other people have opinions that you don’t share? Are you able to let their opinions be heard esp. if you think they are morally wrong?

I made up those things to illustrate that there are facts. They aren’t the only facts that exist. There are oodles of them.

People can have free speech, but no one needs to employ the village idiot if they are denying facts, esp since it won’t just reflect on the village idiot, but also the employer.

Opinions (how to fix problems or do they even need fixing) are something totally different. Differing opinions are everywhere and there’s nothing at all wrong about them. In my own household, on my street, in my classrooms, at my lunch table, etc, there’s a wide variety of opinions on any topic out there.

But having an “opinion” that facts aren’t facts isn’t really an opinion. It’s a fallacy. (Flat earth comes to mind.)

@Happytimes2001

There are always going to be topics on which no one agrees. In the educational setting we used to talk about them. First, we’d address the issue, then we’d talk about both sides, people would raise different facts that they knew or found, then people would air opinions on what the various solutions were. Worked for hundreds of years.
Did something change?

Nothing has changed that I’ve seen when one is discussing opinions. The only change is when folks start denying facts.

[circuitrider]

So, that’s what you want to hang your hat on? A legalistic argument over whether a private university is actually private? Fine with me. I’d love to see the Supreme Court rule that affirmative action is bad when it involves race but nonetheless should cover how many conservatives receive tenure at Yale and Wesleyan. I would love to read that opinion.

[skieurope]

I am at a loss understanding what part of my earlier post was unclear. But it does seem that people want to talk about anything other than the original post.

Closing since keeping open would consume a disproportionate amount of staff time and the discussion seems to serve no purpose other than creating dissent in the community.