Responsible Free Speech in Positions of Power

By now there has been a lot written about the recent activism at Yale and Mizzou both within and outside the Orange Bubble. Though the heart of the issue is about the systemic and structural racism that still pervades college campuses, including the University’s, the debate has largely become one about free speech. While most pieces have centered around debating this right and to what extent, if any, it should be restricted, few have discussed the responsibilities that go along with that right. And because of the dearth of conversation on that important ethical aspect of this discussion, I’d like to add one more log to the pile.

I think the free speech debate is a red herring obscuring the real issue of racism that students of color face at universities. Discussing the potential appropriate restrictions on speech is an important debate to have, but not if it means completely ignoring the decades of very real discrimination that still exists and hindering the formation of solutions. Admittedly, I’m uncertain where the line should be. I think there are certainly some reasonable restrictions on free speech, such as speech concerning libel, clear and present danger concerns, etc. Potentially these restrictions should be expanded to hate speech — it’s a complicated moral question, and I’m just not sure at the moment.

However, I definitely think that the right action for colleges to take is to encourage members of the community to respect each other. This includes enacting policies to address racism on campus. This includes encouraging students not to wear offensive costumes on Halloween even if the administration cannot and perhaps even should not force the issue. And this isn’t just because Yale’s residential college system promised students a “little paradise.” No, the right action for the University is to address racism on college campuses because everyone deserves equal dignity and respect.

Let’s grant that there should be some restrictions on free speech. So yes, Yale’s Intercultural Affairs Committee should be allowed to send the original email urging students to carefully consider their Halloween costumes and avoid wearing something that might offend someone’s identity. And yes, Erika Christakis has the right to send her response. However, the fact that they can does not mean that both should have sent the emails they did.

The truth of the matter is that though individuals have the right to free speech, this also comes with the responsibility to use this freedom wisely. This responsibility is only heightened when one is in a position of power, as University officials are. In the Yale case, both the committee and Christakis wield that power as university leaders, and thus, they have a greater responsibility to use their freedom of speech for the betterment of the community they serve. This betterment includes enacting policies that aim to dismantle racism and discourage behaviors that offend entire identity groups.

It is important to note that the original email does not tell students they could not wear offensive costumes or that they would be punished for doing so. Rather, the committee used its free speech and power to encourage thoughtfulness and respect for “segments of our population based on race, nationality, religious belief or gender expression.” It was respectful of everyone’s freedom of expression, yet used its bully pulpit to encourage respect.

On the other hand, Christakis misused her podium. Yes, she had the right to voice her opinion. And yes, she never directly told students to wear potentially offensive costumes. But her unnecessary reply undercut an important message the university was trying to send — a message she should have used her position of power to support. While she had the freedom to send the message she did, she also had the responsibility to discourage acting offensively toward identity groups and toward the students who deserve equal dignity, rather than questioning the committee’s encouragement of those self-restrictions.

Perhaps the Editorial Board was right when it claimed on Monday that universities should remain neutral in messaging about controversial cases. But it was wrong in implying that situations involving treating other students with equal respect are among those controversial cases. Just as every individual has the duty to carefully consider the impact of his or her freedom of expression, so too do university administrators.A university has the responsibility to use its power and right of freespeech to encourage people to move toward treating all others with respect and dignity.

Marni Morse is a politics major from Washington, D.C. She can be reached at mlmorse@princeton.edu.