Ok, so this is being somewhat misunderstood here, I think. A few observations: - The sentence pg quoted ("Roughly one-third of students are also in favor of ba

Ok, so this is being somewhat misunderstood here, I think. A few observations: - The sentence pg quoted ("Roughly one-third of students are also in favor of banning controversial books from their university library.") is verbatim from the study. - However, this study must be seen in context. It was deliberately and openly designed to detect anti-free-speech sentiment by looking at a specifically chosen probable "worst case", namely social science students at a traditionally left leaning university in Germany (which houses the "Institut für Sozialforschung" that gave rise to the "Frankfurter Schule" (Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse) of critical theory, a predecessor of (among other things) CRT). That this is the case is revealed right in the title of the study: "Is Free Speech in Danger on University Campus? Some Preliminary Evidence from a Most Likely Case", and further emphasised in the text: "We are certainly not under the impression that our sample is representative of university students in general (or the wider public, for that matter). On the contrary, we purposefully consider the social science studentship at Frankfurt as a most likely case." (my emphasis). - So, the study succeeded in detecting some moderately illiberal attitudes in a quarter or so of students at one deliberately chosen "worst case" faculty in Germany. - All the hubbub here about the statistical limitations is overblown, n=501 is not bad for social science and gives a error margin of around 5%, which means the results stand unless there was massive sampling bias.