3 ms·

They're being censored because of their ideas though... I'm not sure how you can draw that distinction.

• geofft 9y ago
  Not necessarily - they're being censored because of their refusal to engage with the scientific community and insistence on presenting their views as scientific when they're not (e.g., Murray) or because their purpose is antics and not ideas (e.g., Yiannopoulos). Both of those are things that a university should disinvite speakers for.
  • AlwaysBCoding 9y ago
    I went to my sisters graduation at Northwestern where Stephen Colbert was the keynote speaker. I don't see a difference between the antics of Colbert and Yiannapoulos other than what tribe they represent. One is a keynote graduation speaker, one has riots that prevent them from speaking on campus.
    • geofft 9y ago
      To be honest, I don't think I can defend inviting Stephen Colbert, either. (Especially if he's in character.) However, commencement speeches do not have a high reputation for academic rigor to start with, so I think inviting an entertainer to speak at one is sort of different from inviting a speaker with some specific experience (either academic, or political/industrial/etc.) to give a lecture. All that said, keep that Yiannopoulos wanted to read out the names of students without legal immigration status on stage at Berkeley. That's the sort of thing I mean by "antics." I don't think Stephen Colbert does anything of the sort. His partisanship and his satirical character mean that I have trouble saying that anything of value will be lost if he stops being invited to speak at college campuses, but he seems qualitatively different from Yiannopoulos.
      • dominotw 9y ago
        > Yiannopoulos wanted to read out the names of students without legal immigration status on stage at Berkeley. I don't think this was ever true, and your whole stance on this hinges on it.