Posted by Eugene Volokh:
Academic Freedom Problem?
[1]A columnist in the Rocky Mountain News writes:
Remember the proclamation of 29 professors at the University of
Denver College of Law denouncing the inquiry into Ward Churchill
because "the critique of conventional wisdom, or the accepted way
of doing (or seeing) things, is essential to fostering the public
debate that is necessary to prevent tyranny"?
Remember the ringing declaration of 199 faculty at the University
of Colorado at Boulder, also in defense of Churchill, on the
importance of an "environment in which ideas may be exchanged even
in the face of widespread doubt, incomprehension and hostility"?
Does such an unfettered intellectual environment actually exist on
any Colorado campus?
In the journal Academic Questions, former Gov. Richard Lamm
recounts an incident that suggests, once again, the answer is
emphatically no.
Lamm, who is a tenured professor at DU, tried to publish an article
in The Source, a newspaper run by the administration there, "in
response to a particularly offensive screed on white racism by one
of our affirmative action officials."
Yet despite personal pleas he took up the DU ladder right into the
chancellor's office, his essay was repeatedly rejected.
It is now online at [2]educationation.org/blog/?p=51. . . . [I]f
Churchill can call for violence and the destruction of America,
surely Lamm can argue that the cultural component in personal
success is much larger than many of us wish to concede.
Or can he?
A couple of people, including [3]InstaPundit, have also suggested that
the refusal to publish Lamm's piece is an academic freedom violation
(whether or not a serious one). But I don't think it is, nor do I
think it is an attempt to "fetter" the "intellectual environment"; and
it seems to me that the analogy to calls for Churchill's firing is
quite unsound.
The Source is run by the administration, and is basically the voice of
the administration -- it places a quite direct imprimatur on
everything it runs in this publication (as opposed to the outside
publications of university faculty members, which have historically
not been seen as having the university's imprimatur, and which
universities often distance themselves from). The administration is
entitled to choose what goes in this publication, just like other
editors are entitled to choose what goes into their publications.
The administration may be faulted for being a bit closed-minded, or
for not serving its readers well, if it refuses to publish important
and interesting commentary. But the administration may also respond
that, important and interesting as the commentary may be, it's not
commentary to which it wants to give its stamp of approval. The
intellectual environment would still remain free if the administration
refused to publish Gov. Lamm's piece -- Gov. Lamm could publish his
articles in student newspapers that choose to carry them, or give
speeches on campus about this topic, or publish the articles
elsewhere. It's just that the administration's own publication would
in this instance not be adding Gov. Lamm's article to that
intellectual environment.
Likewise, if the publication is a means of building goodwill among
potential donors and others the administration may reasonably want to
not publish things that may undermine this goodwill. The Source is not
a scholarly journal aimed at advancing knowledge, but seemingly part
of the university's public relations effort. (As I read [4]Governor
Lamm's preface to his online article, The Source had published what it
saw as "a particularly offensive screed on white racism by one of our
affirmative action officials," which might mean that the
administration is willing to sacrifice public goodwill in the service
of its favored ideologies; but if so, then the administration should
be faulted for that, not for alleged interference with academic
freedom.)
Of course, the administration would have been equally free to refuse
to publish Ward Churchill's speech -- and the administration is
equally forbidden by academic freedom principles from punishing Lamm
for publishing his essay elsewhere. But I think that we must
distinguish (1) decisions not to publish something in an
administration-run publication (and a publication that is a public
relations vehicle rather than a scholarly journal) from (2) decisions
to punish a faculty member for publishing his work elsewhere. The
decisions in category 1 aren't violations of academic freedom.
References
1.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_3712961,00.html
2.
file://localhost/var/www/powerblogs/volokh/posts/educationation.org/blog/?p=51
3. http://instapundit.com/archives/022558.php
4. http://educationation.org/blog/?p=51
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
