Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#2+1
"Opinions expressed by our employees, students, faculty or administrators don't have to be politic or polite. However personally offended we might be, however unfair the association of the University to the opinion might be, I insist that we remain a certain trumpet on this most precious of Constitutional rights."
Seems like 18 years later Colleges/ Social Media / etc love to censor and silence speech. THIS site included.......
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#3I don't think the contents of the poem are really particularly relevant, but for anyone else who is curious here it is:
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#4There's a difference between "freedom of speech" and "freedom from consequences of speech". Many people try to hide behind the protection of the former but actually mean the latter and claim persecution when they have to face consequences (boycotts, bans from privately run services, etc).
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#5+1 "Opinions expressed by our employees, students, faculty or administrators don't have to be politic or polite. However personally offended we might be, however unfair the association of the University to the opinion might be, I insist that we remain a certain trumpet on this most precious of Constitutional rights." Seems like 18 years later Colleges/ Social Media / etc love to censor and silence speech. THIS site i…
Not being on the left has always carried consequences.
Nothing new, unfortunately. I feel that every day.
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#6There's a difference between "freedom of speech" and "freedom from consequences of speech". Many people try to hide behind the protection of the former but actually mean the latter and claim persecution when they have to face consequences (boycotts, bans from privately run services, etc).
"freedom from consequences of speech"
DOXing, violence, threats, death, and/or imprisonment......
Who said there are no consequences? We don't live inside bubbles haha
Every thing we do, don't do or say, don't say has some kind of consequence thanks MOM
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#7There's a difference between "freedom of speech" and "freedom from consequences of speech". Many people try to hide behind the protection of the former but actually mean the latter and claim persecution when they have to face consequences (boycotts, bans from privately run services, etc).
Nobody complain about consequences, what people complain about is when public entities financed by the public like Berkley university prevent people from talking their mind.
As for private entities the problem are with monopolies like facebook which are the facto the city square of modern days and all the laws applied to the public space should be applied to those type of companies also. The same way an electricity or phone company can't deny service because of people political views.
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#8+1 "Opinions expressed by our employees, students, faculty or administrators don't have to be politic or polite. However personally offended we might be, however unfair the association of the University to the opinion might be, I insist that we remain a certain trumpet on this most precious of Constitutional rights." Seems like 18 years later Colleges/ Social Media / etc love to censor and silence speech. THIS site i…
You're being downvoted for being 100% right and 100% on-topic. So much for HN's 'guidelines.'
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#9There's a difference between "freedom of speech" and "freedom from consequences of speech". Many people try to hide behind the protection of the former but actually mean the latter and claim persecution when they have to face consequences (boycotts, bans from privately run services, etc).
Looks like this controversy was about a condescending poen written by a white woman about native girls, that specifically referenced the tribal group of the woman who led the protest (that the author learned of from the protester), and implied some sort of generalized drunken molestation and abuse of native women by the men of that group.
I still don't think that the university should have censored the poem, but
1) a protest isn't just for the university; maybe the author would see the point and withdraw the poem, or maybe people who heard of the controversy would be influenced to think in a different way by hearing the details and the protesters reaction to them, and
2) I'm pretty sure the reaction would have been different if the native woman had written a poem called "Stupid White Whore In My Class" and mentioned the other woman's hometown and family name, and how her uncle probably molested her. The free speech advocates that get super-mad about 10 people picketing in the courtyard of an Alaskan university for 3 days 20 years ago would instead be super-mad about "how you can say anything about white people and get away with it."
It shouldn't be the job of universities to censor speech, though. But protesting speech is also speech.
Re: Freedom of speech memo, President of the university of Alaska, March 2001
#10There's a difference between "freedom of speech" and "freedom from consequences of speech". Many people try to hide behind the protection of the former but actually mean the latter and claim persecution when they have to face consequences (boycotts, bans from privately run services, etc).
because that's how we want the political process to work -- each side has their set of 'privately run services' that is the other side is banned from using. And of course any opinion not popular enough to launch their own bank + payment system + ad network should be banned everywhere unless pre-cleared by one of the political behemoths.