Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 198 posts

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#121

Post by elicash »

zcid wrote: post #89
elicash wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this. I hadn't dug deeply into this previously. Reading this, I'm struck by how fragile our first amendment is that you can be sued for participating in a protest. It sounds like the only things that the university did "wrong" was end a contract and also one of their deans took active part in protesting. Much of the glee seems to stem from the fact that the speech being expressed in the protest was dumb. I…

Multiple school officials were actively participating in the demonization of the business and using their authority to create economic sanctions on the same. I don't see how you can justify their behavior. Especially since Gibson's was an actual victim of a real crime unlike the narrative the school was trying to paint. There was also a link to another article laying out the evidence of collusion by school administra…

I don't "justify" saying stupid things. I just care about freedom of speech.

There's another user who made the point that the facts of this case extend to a dean accusing the business of committing a criminal act. Based on those facts, I think there's a much better argument that you could be making rather than arguing that defending the right to say something is the same as defending the underlying stupid comment.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#122

Post by nradov »

HillaryBriss wrote: post #15
Chazprime wrote: post #2

The merits of the case did not seem to bother Oberlin officials or student protesters. Dean of students Meredith Raimondo reportedly joined the massive protests and even handed out a flier denouncing the bakery as a racist business. Without knowing the details of the case, it's hard to determine who's truly at fault here. Even so, given that the dean herself apparently chastised a dissenting staffer who advocated for…

I don't disagree. But, at a time when the cost/benefit ratio of college is challenged every day in popular discourse, maybe colleges have no choice but to embrace "The customer is always right" as a fundamental value.

College administrators always have the option of doing the right thing, even when it impacts revenue.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#123

Post by nhebb »

grellas wrote: post #14

A bit more factual context: 1. The student "protests" erupted the day after the 2016 election results came in, with a corresponding politically inflammatory element at work in the background. 2. The underlying incident involved an underaged black student who attempted to buy a bottle of wine, was refused, and was then found to have 2 other bottles under his coat as he walked out. When the owner's son chased him out,…

> 14. Oberlin sent a mass email to its alumni association essentially saying that the jury disregarded the clear evidence showing it had done nothing wrong ...

In a move of awesome stupidity, that email was sent out while the case was still in court - just prior to the jury deliberating on the punitive damages.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#124

Post by [deleted] »

deogeo wrote: post #111
elicash wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. But hey, that's me and I'm a free speech supporter.

What about calling someone a pedophile? Should that also not be libel? And before you claim it's different because being a pedophile is a crime - it's not a crime. Acting on it is. Just how being racist isn't a crime, but refusing to serve customers based on race is.

[deleted]

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#125

Post by djakjxnanjak »

rayiner wrote: post #103
elicash wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for being the first person to agree with my fundamental point that there are actual implications to the first amendment when it comes to libel laws. I'd love to hear any of the actual false statements ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OR ITS STAFF. I relied on the so far uncontested statement of facts offered by OP. If those facts are wrong I'd be thrilled to revisit my position.

A university dean admitted to passing out a flyer that falsely stated that the Oberlin student had been assaulted: https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/05/gibsons-bakery-v-oberl... . A police officer testified that the Oberlin students had assaulted the bakery employee, not the other way around. The flyer also stated that the bakery had a long history of racial profiling. But at trial the dean admitted that she didn’t…

Whether someone is a victim of assault or rightfully practiced self-defense is often a difficult question dependent on the states of mind of the people involved in a volatile situation, remembered through the veil of faulty human memories. Details like who used force first are pretty much impossible to determine without a video recording. Of course, police officers are as fallible as anyone else. Defamation requires a willful disregard for truth, and I have a hard time believing that “they committed assault” would be defamation when “they got in a fight” is accurate.

For what it’s worth, I consider myself a liberal, and I went to a liberal arts college cut from the same cloth as Oberlin and wrote anonymous posts debating what I perceived as the excesses of liberal campus activists.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#126

Post by elicash »

deogeo wrote: post #120
elicash wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for being the first person to agree with my fundamental point that there are actual implications to the first amendment when it comes to libel laws. I'd love to hear any of the actual false statements ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OR ITS STAFF. I relied on the so far uncontested statement of facts offered by OP. If those facts are wrong I'd be thrilled to revisit my position.

> Thank you for being the first person to agree with my fundamental point that there are actual implications to the first amendment when it comes to libel laws. He's not the first - the reason I didn't bring it up in my reply was that I agree with it. Libel (and true threats, and incitement to imminent lawless action) absolutely are limits on the first amendment and free speech. They're limits I, even as a free speec…

It's funny. We're disagreeing so strongly here but we fundamentally are so much in closer position here than the people downvoting me and most of the folks disagreeing with me because I even brought up the First Amendment to begin with.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#127

Post by mullingitover »

elicash wrote: post #106
deogeo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article, several of the college faculty claimed the bakery's actions were racist, for which they had no evidence, and plenty of evidence against. "Students, professors and administrators held protests, charging that the bakery was racist and had profiled the three students." Literal comments or the flyer would be better, I agree, but it doesn't look like anyone is objecting to this description of the cont…

I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. But hey, that's me and I'm a free speech supporter.

> I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate.

You're a racist.

Just exercising free speech over here, am I doing this right?

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#128

Post by javajosh »

elicash wrote: post #97
chrismcb wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that the real issue is the college itself claimed that the bakery was racist. It was more about libel and slander then an actual protest. Throw in the fact that the college encouraged students to not go to the establishment... This isn't a first amendment issue.

If libel laws now allow you to successfully sue for tens of millions of dollars because you falsely accuse somebody of being a racist, that's a sad day for freedom of speech. The impact would be truly chilling on national debate. As I stated elsewhere, there are absolutely limits to libel laws based on Constitutional issues as decided in NYT v Sullivan. I wish people were arguing that based on the facts of this case,…

To me, the most important factor in this case is that after the protests, etc the Bakery first asked the University to simply retract it's claims that it was racist and had a history of racism. The University refused, despite having no proof of it's claims, which shows bad faith at least. Another fact that goes to bad faith are the lies they made on the stand, refusing to take responsibility for their actions. If you're reading was correct, and it was an honest mistake, then the University could have and should have corrected it's statement, and should not have lied on the stand.

Another point you make here doesn't make sense: this isn't about "national debate". This is, roughly, about one agent harming another agent with a set of lies designed to harm. If this case involved a newspaper editor getting sued for libel because he called a politician a liar, then yes, you might have a point. But it isn't.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#129

Post by elicash »

inflatableDodo wrote: post #109
elicash wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. But hey, that's me and I'm a free speech supporter.

>I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. So, what is your definition for libel? As it doesn't appear to be the same one in common usage. I am massively in favour of free speech, but I suspect even Voltaire would want some method of restitution to be available should people be spreading lies about him around town.

> spreading lies about him around town

Whether something is libel and unprotected would obviously depend on the lie. We seem to agree about that so I'm not sure what you're claiming I believe.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#130

Post by urbanjunkie »

thatoneuser wrote: post #104
zuminator wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how you're quoting me at saying "well what if this really was racist?" My question was why did the students and faculty think it was racist to the point of going forward with a disastrous trial? About your last paragraph, I feel like you're just illustrating my larger point. Is it really en vogue to "hate on whites" or is the media and internet pushing that narrative because divisiveness brings page view…

You must be misunderstanding something here. This isn't "people on Twitter jawboning" - this is about an institution playing vigilante by deliberately and wrongly accusing a store owner of racism when all he did was try to protect his property. This is real life people losing their jobs and money because they dare to try and stop someone from stealing from them. Not even just the store owner but his employees. Quotin…

Get the fuck over yourself, snowflake.
Post reply on HN