ACTA's Must-Reads
« Problems with protesters | Main | NRO reviews Berube »
Sensitive expressions at DePaul
The DePaul student newspaper reports that the University Speech and Expression Policy Task Force is hard at work "drafting a policy that will create a safe and nurturing environment for the DePaul community to voice their concerns about different issues." DePaul's proposed speech code--which is what this is--is being framed with the "sole purpose" of ensuring "that members of the DePaul community are informed of issues and are able to have their opinions heard;" the policy's framers are reportedly striving "to maintain the core value of open communication among those affiliated with DePaul." The article notes that the task force was created last spring, and that the new policy will particularly affect campus activities, technology, and written communication.
As part of their research, the task force members are holding a campus-wide "listening tour" designed to allow different groups "to speak out about problems that have risen in the past, or what they feel are important issues that should be addressed." The particular questions the task force wishes to answer are: "Given DePaul's values and the university's commitment to free speech and academic freedom, how can we balance the complex needs of all members of our community in drafting a policy on Speech & Expression?" and "About what issues surrounding speech and expression do you want us to be informed?" DePaul is quite clear that free speech is not the ultimate goal here; rather, protecting the sensibilities of various campus constituencies is: "It is not imperative that the policy cautiously protect and preserve the expressional rights of all the members of the DePaul community. However, it is also important to keep other important values in mind ... including DePaul's commitment to tolerance and productive lively discourse, as well as the necessary practicalities of managing a large community."
DePaul is within its rights, as a private, Catholic institution, to restrict speech as it wishes. But it certainly has a moral obligation not to apply double standards when it does choose to restrict--and punish--expression.
Perhaps it is too much to hope that the task force will address--as one of the issues about which it should be informed--DePaul's mindbogglingly inconsistent treatment of various forms of political expression. Cases that come to mind include the university's decision to punish the College Republicans for protesting Ward Churchill's visit--by posting flyers that quoted his own words; adjunct professor Thomas Klocek's indefinite suspension for disagreeing with some pro-Palestinian students' views; and Holocaust denier and political science professor Norm Finkelstein's rabidly anti-semitic attacks on Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz.
Posted by acta online at October 16, 2006 10:03 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.goactablog.org/blog/mt-tb.cgi/231