7 ms·

Being an educational institution should involve more than just indulging the students The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) free-speech ra

by vwoolf 4y ago

Being an educational institution should involve more than just indulging the students The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) free-speech rankings seem like a good proxy for this: https://www.thefire.org/research/publications/student-surveys/2022-college-free-speech-rankings/ https://www.thefire.org/research/publications/student-survey...

hirundo 4y ago
https://rankings.thefire.org/rank/school/oberlin-college https://rankings.thefire.org/rank/school/oberlin-college: Ranking #135, Speech Climate: Slightly Below Average So, pretty normal.
- sbuttgereit 4y ago
  Out of 208; Speech Code: Yellow Hmmm... pretty normal and barely passing.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  A few things: 1. The total ranking is wholistic, it includes pressure felt both by peers and by faculty. Given "being the adult in the room" might include reigning in peer-pressure that's probably fine. 2. FWIW, It was ranked much better on "Administrative support" 3. Tolerance for conservative speakers: #197/203 (obviously there is a lot of self-selection of liberal students going to Oberlin, so it would be very easy to be the only person with a particular conservative viewpoint, and even easier to think you are). Disclosure: My sister graduated from Oberlin 20 years ago. She was an avid line-dancer at the time and would change out of her boots before going back on campus.
crackercrews 4y ago
I can't find the link, but I read recently that FIRE came out against this verdict because they believe it infringes free speech. I agree the FIRE rankings are a good resource. But it's worth pointing out that FIRE opposes this verdict.
- pc86 4y ago
  Whose free speech? This verdict doesn't have anything to do with the students protesting, does it? I thought it was based [almost?] entirely on the fact that the Dean of Students was handing out these ridiculous flyers.
  - sofixa 4y ago
    From TFA: > In its ruling, the Court of Appeals agreed that students had a right to protest. But the court said that the flier and a related student senate resolution — which said that the store had a history of racial profiling — were not constitutionally protected opinion. So the fliers and the student senate resolution are not free speech.
- 7402 4y ago
  That doesn't sound right. It doesn't match up with what I know of FIRE. I couldn't find anything to suggest that FIRE opposed the verdict in my searches. Please try to find the link - I'd like to see it. I did find one document [0] that was a legal filing that references some FIRE documents discussing speech codes, but that was it. FIRE didn't sign it, and as far as I can tell FIRE had nothing to do with the filing supporting Oberlin. Some of the attorneys signing the filing identified themselves as "Attorneys for Amici Curiae National Coalition Against Censorship, and Defending Rights & Dissent." NCAC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_Against_Censorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_Against_Cen...) and DRAD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defending_Rights_%26_Dissent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defending_Rights_%26_Dissent) are not the same thing as FIRE. [0] https://www2.oberlin.edu/appeal/documents/amicus-ncac_osc.pdf https://www2.oberlin.edu/appeal/documents/amicus-ncac_osc.pd...
  - crackercrews 4y ago
    I tried searching again but failed. I think I probably heard a mention of it on a podcast since I can't find a link. Maybe the Reason Roundtable? I am 90% certain this was FIRE I'm recalling. I was caught off-guard because I generally agree with FIRE, and my first reaction was that this was an exception. It made me rethink about my reaction to the verdict. I can't think of another organization that fits this description in my mind. But I could be wrong! I will continue thinking about where I saw or heard this and leave a link if I can find it.
dillondoyle 4y ago
I just spent some time looking around that site. most of the example complaints they highlight are just students saying they don't feel comfortable speaking up or they had dorm mate issues. Does not feel like a good way to rank a school's actions to hinder speech (as an institution/administration). Does have some better real examples but large majority I read were not. Just because you don't feel comfortable doesn't mean someone is stopping you from speaking. You can't force someone to live with or listen to ones ___ whatever religion, hate speech, crazy liberal ideas etc. And yes.. Most young people are pretty open minded and fairly liberal. If you hold views outside that box you should speak them! But you can't be made if people judge you or the majority speak themselves against those beliefs. I don't see how those common complaints are a school forcing someone to be silent or punishing them for their viewpoints. Maybe I'm being too emotional given recent court rulings/direction of my country; Which is probably why I took so much time on that site and commenting. But your speech !== that I will listen, or not judge you, or allow you to be around me. A lot of the religious court rulings (PrEP most recent) feel like these complaints. Freedom to speak/express your religion does not go so far as to control my choices and my body or force me to listen to you.

by vwoolf 4y ago

hirundo 4y ago

https://rankings.thefire.org/rank/school/oberlin-college https://rankings.thefire.org/rank/school/oberlin-college: Ranking #135, Speech Climate: Slightly Below Average So, pretty normal.

sbuttgereit 4y ago
Out of 208; Speech Code: Yellow Hmmm... pretty normal and barely passing.
aidenn0 4y ago
A few things: 1. The total ranking is wholistic, it includes pressure felt both by peers and by faculty. Given "being the adult in the room" might include reigning in peer-pressure that's probably fine. 2. FWIW, It was ranked much better on "Administrative support" 3. Tolerance for conservative speakers: #197/203 (obviously there is a lot of self-selection of liberal students going to Oberlin, so it would be very easy to be the only person with a particular conservative viewpoint, and even easier to think you are). Disclosure: My sister graduated from Oberlin 20 years ago. She was an avid line-dancer at the time and would change out of her boots before going back on campus.

crackercrews 4y ago

I can't find the link, but I read recently that FIRE came out against this verdict because they believe it infringes free speech. I agree the FIRE rankings are a good resource. But it's worth pointing out that FIRE opposes this verdict.

pc86 4y ago
Whose free speech? This verdict doesn't have anything to do with the students protesting, does it? I thought it was based [almost?] entirely on the fact that the Dean of Students was handing out these ridiculous flyers.
- sofixa 4y ago
  From TFA: > In its ruling, the Court of Appeals agreed that students had a right to protest. But the court said that the flier and a related student senate resolution — which said that the store had a history of racial profiling — were not constitutionally protected opinion. So the fliers and the student senate resolution are not free speech.
7402 4y ago
That doesn't sound right. It doesn't match up with what I know of FIRE. I couldn't find anything to suggest that FIRE opposed the verdict in my searches. Please try to find the link - I'd like to see it. I did find one document [0] that was a legal filing that references some FIRE documents discussing speech codes, but that was it. FIRE didn't sign it, and as far as I can tell FIRE had nothing to do with the filing supporting Oberlin. Some of the attorneys signing the filing identified themselves as "Attorneys for Amici Curiae National Coalition Against Censorship, and Defending Rights & Dissent." NCAC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_Against_Censorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_Against_Cen...) and DRAD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defending_Rights_%26_Dissent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defending_Rights_%26_Dissent) are not the same thing as FIRE. [0] https://www2.oberlin.edu/appeal/documents/amicus-ncac_osc.pdf https://www2.oberlin.edu/appeal/documents/amicus-ncac_osc.pd...
- crackercrews 4y ago
  I tried searching again but failed. I think I probably heard a mention of it on a podcast since I can't find a link. Maybe the Reason Roundtable? I am 90% certain this was FIRE I'm recalling. I was caught off-guard because I generally agree with FIRE, and my first reaction was that this was an exception. It made me rethink about my reaction to the verdict. I can't think of another organization that fits this description in my mind. But I could be wrong! I will continue thinking about where I saw or heard this and leave a link if I can find it.

dillondoyle 4y ago

I just spent some time looking around that site. most of the example complaints they highlight are just students saying they don't feel comfortable speaking up or they had dorm mate issues. Does not feel like a good way to rank a school's actions to hinder speech (as an institution/administration). Does have some better real examples but large majority I read were not. Just because you don't feel comfortable doesn't mean someone is stopping you from speaking. You can't force someone to live with or listen to ones ___ whatever religion, hate speech, crazy liberal ideas etc. And yes.. Most young people are pretty open minded and fairly liberal. If you hold views outside that box you should speak them! But you can't be made if people judge you or the majority speak themselves against those beliefs. I don't see how those common complaints are a school forcing someone to be silent or punishing them for their viewpoints. Maybe I'm being too emotional given recent court rulings/direction of my country; Which is probably why I took so much time on that site and commenting. But your speech !== that I will listen, or not judge you, or allow you to be around me. A lot of the religious court rulings (PrEP most recent) feel like these complaints. Freedom to speak/express your religion does not go so far as to control my choices and my body or force me to listen to you.