3 ms·

Can anyone say what this section means in practice?: >A commitment to free expression includes hearing and hosting speakers, including those whose views or opi

Can anyone say what this section means in practice?: >A commitment to free expression includes hearing and hosting speakers, including those whose views or opinions may not be shared by many members of the MIT community and may be harmful to some. This commitment includes the freedom to criticize and peacefully protest speakers to whom one may object, but it does not extend to suppressing or restricting such speakers from expressing their views. I'm interested in hearing how the process for selecting speakers currently works, as well as how the signatories would like it to be changed. If a single faculty member wishes to invite a speaker, does that give that speaker the right to talk in an official capacity? What if a speaker has no support on campus? Are they entitled to be hosted by MIT? If not, are they being 'restricted from expressing their views'?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
SteveDR 4y ago
> I'm interested in hearing how the process for selecting speakers currently works, as well as how the signatories would like it to be changed. I think any student or faculty member can invite a speaker. The policy is about when it’s acceptable for the university to step in and say that an event (or protest) can’t happen. > If a single faculty member wishes to invite a speaker, does that give that speaker the right to talk in an official capacity? I think that currently a speaking event can be canceled on the basis that the speaker promotes harmful ideas. The signatories want to remove this from the list of acceptable reasons for cancelling an event that someone wants to happen.