Dear Editors,
I read with interest your Feb. 11 article on the 2:1 student opposition to University political statements, in which you claimed that all political statements are protected by academic freedom.
Please understand that not all political comments are protected by academic freedom. In the mouths of individuals expressing personal convictions, they are indeed protected speech under the First Amendment, meaning the individual has the right to say them without government interference.
However, the protections afforded by the principle of academic freedom operate at a different level and relate to the ability of the university or other academic institutions like societies, journals, etc., to prevent academics from using academic channels such as publications, university websites, classroom lectures, etc., to convey academic ideas or statements. Such protection is only afforded to speech that is both academic and responsible.
I refer you to the American Association of University Professors 1915 statement on this where you will find elements of responsibility to include such ideas as that academic freedom is conditioned by conclusions being “set forth with dignity, courtesy and temperateness of language” and that they “set forth justly, without suppression or innuendo, the divergent opinions of other investigators.”
Insofar as speech is not set forth with dignity or courtesy, or does not provide a reasonable consideration of the best opposing arguments without innuendo, it does not merit the protections of academic freedom, and to date, nobody, including our committee, has determined that the antisemitic statements put up by several units in the College of Liberal Arts after the Oct. 7 pogrom in Israel, meet this standard.
Indeed, a major problem is that the relevant administrators and administrative bodies have steadfastly avoided the question.
Our Senate Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee has indeed produced a novel recommendation that institutional unit speech be afforded the protections of academic freedom. I refer you to appendix B of that report, which explains that this goes against over 100 years of thoughtful commentary on academic freedom, where such freedoms protect academics from their institutions, while this innovation actually traverses academic freedom, namely of scholars who dissent from their departmental statements.
Dr. Kyba is the Carey Ramey CCRF Professor of Pediatrics and a current member of the Senate Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee.