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

Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

texastribune.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 223 posts

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#71

Post by [deleted] »

vxNsr wrote: post #68
ceejayoz wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think Trump's team only ever asked for one single tweet to come down, I don't know what to tell you. Again, censorship requests aren't a First Amendment violation. Joe Biden can request you go fuck yourself. He cannot order you to go fuck yourself. The Twitter Files make it quite clear Twitter etc. understood this distinction. For example, here's a Twitter Files post of them saying "go get a court order" to a…

Wow, why does it always feel like I get into this same merrygoround every 6 months with the same goalposts being retreated to the same positions, with each argument until we’re suddenly talking about how Reagan once brushed past a reporter so clearly his party is the authoritarian one. It’s so tiring. We went from politicians ordering (with implied threats) political action from private citizens to the FBI requesting…

[deleted]

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#72

Post by snvzz »

mikeyouse wrote: post #34

It's worth knowing more details than the headline here: 1. Professor Joy Alonzo, who's an expert in Opiod harm-reduction gave a talk where according to all accounts, she mildly critiqued the Lt. Governor and state's preferences for punitive approaches for drug control and that they are considered Federal non-reporters on Opioid stats since they don't collect the data required. 2. Dawn Buckingham, the TX Land Commissi…

Everybody but the professor. Prof. did no wrongdoing.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#73

Post by claytongulick »

ceejayoz wrote: post #40
vxNsr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s an incredibly aggressive intentional misinterpretation of what I said. In the last 3 years we had government officials directing, in very strong language, various tech companies on what was and was not allowed on their platforms. While many people might argue that tech platforms are not public squares and should be free to censor however they like, everyone should have a problem with politicians directing tech…

> In the last 3 years we had government officials directing, in very strong language, various tech companies on what was and was not allowed on their platforms. And, as is their First Amendment right, those tech companies frequently responded with "no". This is very clear from the Twitter Files information, even if the journalists involved glossed over that point. For example: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/38…

Case history and law are very clear about how the first amendment can be violated by even subtle pressure from the government.

I recommend reading judge Doughty's decision [1]. It's a long read, but well worth your time.

[1] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.18...

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#74

Post by akira2501 »

wintogreen74 wrote: post #49
justin66 wrote: post #25

How weirdly fragile and vindictive do you have to be to initiate a formal complaint against a guest lecturer for making an observation about public policy you think is off-base? How lame do you have to be to even know how to do that, and to do it so fast that the lecturer heard about it when she got home?

So the same people who fight change they interpret as pushing "woke" culture also believe they have a right to never be exposed to criticism or negative comments against anything with which they identify?

I don't think calls for "formal censure" and attacks on an individuals livelihood are the same as "criticism" or "negative comments." I think the effort to normalize the two being viewed negatively is entirely understandable.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#75

Post by jlkuester7 »

JohnMakin wrote: post #55
marcusverus wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget California, where faculty is effectively required to engage in progressive political speech! https://archive.is/VDNPj

[flagged]

Seems pretty clear from the article that the expectations for professors was that they had to adhere, not to a general "don't be racist" code of conduct, but instead to a specific ideologies ("that reflect DEIA and anti-racist principles"). I think it is reasonable to describe those ideologies as "progressive" (at least in the sense that they are promoted and promulgated almost exclusively by people who would describe themselves as progressive)...

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#76

Post by harshreality »

kbenson wrote: post #41
harshreality wrote: post #6

> Neither UTMB nor Texas A&M would confirm what Alonzo said that prompted such a reaction, and UTMB students interviewed by the Tribune recalled a vague reference to Patrick’s office but nothing specific. Without knowing what was allegedly said, this is difficult to judge, although I would certainly be inclined to side with the professor given what's been reported so far. Professors should be given wide latitude to d…

Ultimately Texas A&M allowed Alonzo to keep her job after an internal investigation could not confirm any wrongdoing. It's really not that hard to judge at all. They found no wrongdoing, and refust to even release what the purported problematic statements were. Their refusal to do so, and how that affects how you view the situation and whether it was warranted are exactly why it's problematic to behave like this in t…

Every investigation of a professor, which fails to result in any official disciplinary action, should be equally condemned? How are universities supposed to investigate allegations then? Allegations are made all the time without administrations making the allegations public. They routinely take "protective" actions like limiting professors' non-critical duties during investigations. Do you condemn all those actions, too?

This is not a criminal investigation. Organizations, even public ones, have wide latitude in how they handle internal investigations as long as they're not making overt public accusations before verifying them.

I'm not saying these kinds of investigations are good. The investigation itself is a punishment. However, administrations have a lot of discretion in future actions, discretion which they can exercise against a professor, without recourse, even when there's no policy violation to cite and punish them for. It's impossible to avoid unofficial punishments, and a punishing investigation process is just another one of those.

I'm also not saying that suspension was a reasonable action to take during this investigation. It sounds extreme for any investigation of comments made by a professor. But I don't know what the allegation was and nobody else is saying what it was. The fact that nobody else is willing to remember on the record what the professor might have said doesn't mean she didn't say anything worth investigating.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#77

Post by tacticalturtle »

JohnMakin wrote: post #55
marcusverus wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget California, where faculty is effectively required to engage in progressive political speech! https://archive.is/VDNPj

[flagged]

Not sure what you mean by this - regardless of whether you agree with antiracism or progressivism- if you take them at face value, ie “progressivism” = reforming society to improve the average human condition, and “antiracism” = reforming society to be less racist, they seem fairly aligned, no?

Also I suspect that the venn diagram of politicians who self-identify as anti-racist, vs politicians who self-identify as progressive is something very close to a circle.

The binary nature of antiracism - if you’re not in agreement with antiracism you’re a racist - is not something I would associate with a middle of the road politician.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#79

Post by akira2501 »

vkou wrote: post #64
neilv wrote: post #52

> And Sharp was communicating directly with the lieutenant governor’s office about the incident, promising swift action. In Texas, what entities have oversight over potential abuses of power by the Lt. Governor's office, the Texas A&M system Chancellor, and the Texas Land Commissioner? Are they credible? I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but am wondering whether this credible-looking journalism will prompt govern…

Texas's attorney general has had been both state, and federally indicted for fraud for the past 8 years, and has successfully stalled the case, on the basis[1] that as long as he's a Republican politician, he can't get a fair trial. He's only been impeached for it this year . There is no oversight to be had in that kind of single-party state. If you're wondering about what the end game of that sort of thing looks lik…

How does a /state/ prosecutor have the ability to interfere with the prosecutorial budgets for a /federal/ indictment?

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#80

Post by claytongulick »

ceejayoz wrote: post #62
vxNsr wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol using the one instance that trump asked for something stupid and was denied and pretending that happened a lot is again a very intentional mischaracterization of what happened. Not only is that apparently like one of the only times trump asked for something it’s totally dwarfed in comparison to the Biden admin’s many censorship requests which had no pushback despite being equally frivolous. Not to mention the lap…

If you think Trump's team only ever asked for one single tweet to come down, I don't know what to tell you. Again, censorship requests aren't a First Amendment violation. Joe Biden can request you go fuck yourself. He cannot order you to go fuck yourself. The Twitter Files make it quite clear Twitter etc. understood this distinction. For example, here's a Twitter Files post of them saying "go get a court order" to a…

> Again, censorship requests aren't a First Amendment violation

That's probably not true. Volumes of case law support that even subtle pressure from the government to influence speech is a first amendment violation.

Post reply on HN