LettersUS universities should protect free speech, but not at the expense of moral clarity

Readers discuss the congressional hearing on the rise of antisemitism in US college campuses, Hong Kong’s free Wi-fi service, the challenge facing traditional broadcasters, and the serious consequences of overworking

4-MIN READ4-MIN

Harvard President Claudine Gay (left) speaks as then University of Pennsylvania president Liz Magill listens, during a congressional hearing on December 5. Magill has stepped down in the wake of a backlash over their comments. Photo: AP

Published: 11:30am, 13 Dec 2023Updated: 9:24am, 14 Dec 2023

Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification.

At a US congressional hearing last week addressing antisemitism on college campuses in the wake of the outbreak of war in Gaza, the responses of the presidents of MIT, Harvard University and University of Pennsylvania lacked moral clarity and effective leadership. They should have directly condemned Hamas for its actions on October 7, denounced antisemitism, bigotry, Islamophobia and hate speech in all forms, and rejected talk of genocide against any particular group.

Furthermore, they should have highlighted the actions they had already taken and what they planned to do, as well as the crucial balance between free speech and maintaining a respectful campus environment where everyone feels safe. They overlooked these essential humane and ethical points in their approach.

Public colleges in the US, which are seen as government entities, adhere to the First Amendment protecting free speech. In contrast, private colleges have more flexibility in speech regulation to maintain a positive learning environment, potentially limiting speech.

Despite the First Amendment not directly applying to private campus conduct, the university respects free speech (even when we fully disagree with the speech) while aiming for a respectful environment. The First Amendment necessitates that oftentimes ugly speech is nevertheless protected, and the job of a university president is to balance the interests of all concerned while respecting even those whose speech is ugly.

The codes of conduct and rules at most universities distinguish correctly between speech and actions. For example, acts such as assault, vandalism, stalking and harassment are all not protected by the First Amendment.