Universities Cater to Intolerance, Cancel Controversial Speakers at Alarming Rate

In the wake of the successful campaigns to
prevent the commencement addresses of three high-profile
speakers—Condoleezza Rice at Rutgers University,
Ayaan Hirsi-Ali at Brandeis University and Christine Lagarde at
Smith College—many censorship-weary spectators of higher education
fretted that “disinvitation season” seemed worse than ever this
year.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) now has
data to back up those fears. Since 2000, an increasing number of
campus speakers faced both informal and formal muzzling at the
hands of students, faculty and administrators eager to disrupt the
presentation of viewpoints they don’t like, according
to FIRE’s latest report.

“Disinvitation efforts are not new, but our research indicates
that they are dramatically increasing,” the report found.

FIRE noted that some prospective campus speakers voluntarily
canceled their speeches after students and faculty protested their
inclusion. Others were formally disinvited by university
administrators. In some instances, speakers attempted to deliver
their remarks but were silenced by hecklers. While this third kind
of intolerance—the abject kind—was rarest, it occurred more
frequently over the last few years.

While a speaker’s conservative views on gay marriage, abortion
and the War on Terror were most likely to yield a disinvitation,
left-of-center speakers such as former Department of Homeland
Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and activist Bill Ayers have
also endured repeated silencing.

A key finding: Public and private universities disinvited
speakers at nearly equal rates. As the report explains:

Disinvitation incidents occurred in remarkably even numbers
among public colleges and universities (68), private secular
institutions (59), and private religious institutions (65). The
split between the types of institutions is surprisingly close,
revealing a systemic problem—some students and faculty at colleges
and universities of all types appear increasingly unwilling to
allow those with whom they disagree to speak and advocate for their
position on campus.

Private universities are well within their rights to cater to
political correctness and rescind speaking invitations, of course.
And students at private and public institutions have the right to
protest speakers with whom they disagree.

Even so, colleges that cultivate an aura of knee-jerk hostility
toward different ways of thinking are depriving students of one of
the cardinal benefits of campus life: the opportunity to interact
with unfamiliar perspectives and engage new ideas. They are also

subtly teaching students to fear controversy and abhor
dissent.

Given such an unfriendly environment for free expression, it’s
not surprising that some students now believe the syllabi for their
English classes
should come with warning labels that the works of Shakespeare
and Homer may cause emotional distress.