More US academics self-censoring to avoid controversy

A significant number of US academics are self-censoring to avoid controversy, according to a major survey that suggests that faculty today are more scared than they were in the McCarthy era.

The Faculty Survey Report from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) found that 87 per cent of faculty reported difficulties in having an open and honest conversation about at least one hot-button political topic.

With 70 per cent of respondents reporting an issue, the Israel-Hamas conflict was the most controversial subject, followed by racial inequality (51 per cent), transgender rights (49 per cent) and affirmative action (47 per cent).

A Louisiana professor recently came under fire for making comments about students who voted for Donald Trump in the presidential election. The survey found that 41 per cent of academics reported difficulty in having honest conversations about the election, and a quarter of faculty said they often hid their political beliefs in order to keep their job.

When academics cannot discuss important issues of the day, students lose a valuable opportunity to learn about the world around them, warned the report.

“Although I am more in the middle of the road and have viewpoints on both sides, I feel like I need to keep my mouth shut or I would be ostracised or fired,” one professor told FIRE.

Faculty without tenure and those with right-wing views tended to be even more concerned that they might be sacked for expressing their views. And only one in five respondents said a political conservative would be a positive fit for their department.

The survey, which polled 6,269 academics at 55 major colleges and universities, found that a quarter of faculty felt unable to express their opinion on a subject because of how others would respond.

And a third (35 per cent) reported toning down their writings to avoid controversy. FIRE said this was nearly four times the rate who responded similarly when the same question was asked of social scientists in 1954, at the height of the McCarthyite witch-hunt against suspected communists.

To combat the problem, a number of institutions have recently adopted positions of institutional neutrality, which free speech advocates have welcomed.

What can universities do to protect academic freedom?

In announcing its policy of “intuitional restraint” on 11 December, Dartmouth College said it aims to foster a community where faculty, students and staff can engage on complex issues.

John Carey, a professor in the social sciences at Dartmouth, said: "This policy is not Dartmouth pulling back from public engagement. Instead, we’re giving individuals in our community more room to speak.”

The new polling found that most academics agree – with two-thirds of respondents believing universities should not take positions on political and social issues.

While many academics have very positive experiences on campus, FIRE said the current climate of self-censorship was not sustainable for higher education.

“Academic freedom may technically exist, but many faculty appear to lack faith that it will be there to protect them – their work, their reputations, or their jobs – in times of need,” concluded the report.

“For many, the risks today are just too high.”

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com