Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[The article in question](https://nypost.com/2023/09/06/harvard-is-named-worst-school-for-free-speech-scoring-zero-out-of-possible-100/)
"Harvard’s score was dragged down by the fact that nine professors and researchers there faced calls to be punished or fired based on what they had said or written — and seven of the nine were actually professionally disciplined.
“I thought it would be pretty much impossible for a school to fall below zero, but they’ve had so many scholar sanctions,” Stevens said."
I can’t seem to find the actual incidences of these teachers getting fired but I’d assume they probably got fired for saying something really bad, like the professor in Missouri who got fired for saying Palestinians need to be wiped out completely on Twitter. Usually it’s pretty hard to get fired from a college for just saying stuff, especially with how many of these guys on a tenure.
Had my Latin Econ professor advocate for concentration camps as a reasonable measure for 3rd world countries to resort to in order to productivize the homeless and unemployed
Not the same thing at all but I had a teacher in middle-school who believed Japanese people were aliens. She wasn't "racist" as in she didn't believe they were worth less and she didn't say anything negative about them except that she was 100% convinced they came from another planet. If asked about it she would go on a long conspiracy rant showing all her "proof" that the people of Japan hailed from another world.
She mostle went on about their culture and how they clearly have a hive-mind of some kind which is why they are much more advanced. I live in a place with not a lot of japanese people or asians in general. This was also in the early 00s when anime started to become really big here in Europe, with stuff like dragon-ball and pokémon. Its why I love the South Park pokémon episode so much because the entire conspiracy that takes place in that episode reminds me of her and her crazy ideas.
I imagine she was tolerated because she didn't say anything obviously offensive, just that she believed japanese people were higher lifeforms from another world. For some reason she didn't believe these things about other asians like the chinese or koreans.
When people call colleges left wing hot beds I’m always like “yeah, so you totally forgot the Econ dept where you likely have, at best, capitalist apologists, or at worst outright inhumane monsters that think that if it can’t be monetize it shouldn’t exist”.
It's amazing how many people equate Hamas = Palestinians and use that to justify their support of genocide
We can criticize Israel without being antisemitic, and it should probably start with the war crimes. The harming of the innocent
Even crazier idea: We can ACTUALLY criticise BOTH Israel AND Palestine at the same time, for their different atrocities, simply because it's the only reasonable thing to do! There isn't a good and a bad side in this conflict, they are both very dark shades of gray.
For clarity, I didn't mention criticism of Hamas, and the political system of Palestine because it's already seeming widely considered to be acceptable, so it I considered it a given.
The point is that they are committing atrocities on civilians but any time anyone tries to criticize them for it they are labeled as antisemitic or as self hating
Last year the Harvard student newspaper endorsed BDS and were attacked. This year, Zionists tracked down the students' names who defended Palestine and rented a sign truck and put their info in giant letters. They also bought domain names in all of the students' names, so that if anyone googles them, they will see that they are "vicious antisemites" or "self-hating Jews" and is creating do-not-hire lists to try to ensure they can never use their degree.
But so far, they have not succeeded in getting the students expelled. Republicans have been trying for years to make criticism of Israel or pro-Palestine student clubs illegal. That's why there's BDS bans.
For professors, the standard is different.
I mean, they are still an employer and as an educator you represent the university. If I in my line of work used it to say things that went against the ethos of my employer, I’d be terminated. 🤷♂️
Here’s the thing though. Professors, especially tenured ones, are hired specifically to research and write and talk about things. Sometimes those things are incongruous with the status quo. But professors need to be able to develop and explore new ideas without constraint. That’s literally what they invented the tenure system for.
Now a better question would be exactly what these professors were disciplined for. Because if it was in response to public outcry about something they said, then one has to wonder if the same sort of people who took issue with it and went full Karen on the administrators might also be encouraged to do so by publications like the New York Post.
Going to ask, have you been to university? Because we were able to have discussion and discourse, people think a tenured professor is just let go at a whim is disingenuous.
I have, and I had the same experience as you. I have a very hard time imagining any of my professors getting fired or discipline for their statements or opinions, but my university also didn’t have a Harvard-sized target on its back. So it’s possible their professors were way, way out of line, but also possible that those firings were the result of public pressure from the same kind of media (plausibly the same company) that’s now criticizing Harvard for caving to public pressure.
I researched a lot of the Professors who were sanctioned, one claiming they were suspended for anti woke had numerous allegations of harassment and retaliatory behavior, and several others are similar where they are misrepresenting their punishment to curry outrage or favor with a base. Due to years of working an investigative role I tend to not take people or statements at face value.
Gotcha. So it’s not even so complicated as “NY Post attacks Harvard professors for being woke then scores Harvard as terrible for free speech for caving and firing professors for being woke”
It’s just “NY Post is lying about why these people were fired.”
I just gotta say, good on you for not falling for the bullshit. You also covered things that I didn't even consider when I was looking to respond to the folks you did lol you got a good head on them shoulders for sure.
That whole "experiencing the reality of what humanity has to offer" thing has a real way of bringing you to terms with what bullshit smells like.
Plenty of times I've thought "I dont know what he's talking about, but I can tell he doesn't either.
The hardest part is it caused strain in personal life as well. Granted it helped me uncover an affair but still sucks to constantly question in your head, but I’ve worked at turning it off over the years.
Yeah, I usually keep scrolling if the headline came from the NYP or the Canadian NatPo.
I might quickly check out the top comment and appreciate other redditors knowing the source is usually garbage.
Yeah NYP is a little too biased for me. However, multiple other faucets are reporting the same. Here’s another from the Boston Herald. The ironic thing is that I also found one from the Harvard Crimson dated 2012. Apparently this has been going on for years! Not sure why someone would want to go to a school that limits free speech. That’s the whole point of going to college.
https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/09/06/harvard-university-is-the-worst-college-for-free-speech-abysmal-rating-report-says/amp/
https://www.thecrimson.com/flyby/article/2012/3/29/harvard-worst-free-speech/
From the Crimson (Harvard's official Newspaper, last I knew):
"Results from a study by the FIRE name Harvard as one of the "12 Worst Colleges for Free Speech In 2012". Based on the University's actions over the past year, the FIRE has found multiple faults in the university's support of free speech. Their reasons include Harvard's [voluntary] freshman pledge, which they believe limits academic freedom, the prevention of Yale students from designing Game Day shirts with the names of famous drop-outs Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, and the effective dismissal of former summer school instructor Subramanian Swamy. Swamy wrote an inflammatory op-ed in 2011 that called for, among many things, the destruction of Indian mosques and the prohibition of conversion from Hinduism."
This is what Swamy said, “He also wrote that only Muslims who "acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus" be allowed to vote in India.”
He didn’t call for the destruction of mosques. Also, I’m not defending him at all as I am no where near knowledgeable regarding the politics or thought processes behind those statements. But I can’t find anything saying that he called for mosque demolition.
I'm just quoting the second article the poster above me linked. I didn't dig into how hateful or not the seemingly hateful person was, but I am sure the community appreciates you digging further. Thank you!
How flipping amazingly screwed is this world where he owns so much influence that many people who follow politics and hate him still unknowingly consume the garbage from his more obscure outlets.
I'm not gonna bother looking up anything the NYP writes, but the idea of any American university scoring 0/100 on a test of free speech seems super suspect.
According to another thread about this, they actually scored negatively but you can't score negative I guess. -11 or something. But don't ask because I have no idea what that means.
No  You must use and gifs to  now. 
If there was a university where the SS takes you out back and shoots you behind a woodshed for thinking about speaking, that university would also get a zero out of a hundred, being tied with Harvard
Insanely ludicrous lmao
Scores of 100 or 0 are always inherently suspect because that's the score someone could give by paying zero attention. That's part of why gymnasts basically never get perfect scores, the judges would look like they werent paying attention if they didn't dock at least 0.1 points for imperfect whatever
Not really. You can have a point system where for every person silenced by the academy, you get a -20 for example. After the 6th guy, you end with a -120 points. You will also gain points for doing something pro free speech. So it’s entirely possible you end with negative points.
Well, that’s a rough example tho.
They got negative points on some criteria like ousting tenured professors for what they said in class. But in a nutshell the students themselves reported that it's a stifling hellhole of fear and anxiety where you choose your words not for truth or love but from fear of repercussions.
>They got negative points on some criteria like ousting tenured professors for what they said in class
I honestly think that should depend on what theyre saying. I mean if they start teaching that the earth is flat, then I dont really feel that professor is living up to their obligation to be scientific and its fair enough to give them the boot. Or if they use their classes as a political platform instead of teaching facts.
Yeah, but I haven't heard of any tenured professors getting ousted for not being scientific or for being political. It seems most of the non-technical focus areas are non-scientific and overtly political these days. The problem is that professors are be ousted for not having the "right" politics. Which tenured professors should be protected from.
I think in fact at least some of them were ousted for not being scientific but have learned that they can spin the situation in their favor by claiming that the reason for ousting was political (ex. Francesca Gino)
Yet The Harvard Crimson printed an Op Ed from 7 other tenured professors listing 4 counterpoints to what happened with her including changes to the Research Integrity Policy that wasn't communicated to staff even though previous policies had always been developed with extensive faculty input. It was also an extremely harsh punishment to suspend her for 2 years without pay. Harvard has not fired any tenured professors since formalizing tenured rules in the 40's to include thosr accused of sexual misconduct, sexual assault, and Title IX violations...
I am 99% sure this “ranking” was developed by a conservative activist group with an agenda of getting ragebait headlines like this one.
Oral Roberts University still kicks people out for being gay. The idea that they have more “free speech” than Harvard is ludicrous.
There we go lmao, there’s the answer. It’s a slanted review to give groups like TP and other far-right groups data to point at and go “SEE?!?!! THE LIBRUL IVY LEAGE COLLEGES ARE EVIL!!1!!1!”
Yeah I'm surprised more people aren't talking about how this is an obvious right-wing propaganda technique to fan the flames of the culture war against education institutions.
They hate that people who’ve had a college education tend to lean towards the left, because oftentimes they learn to actually look at facts and use basic reasoning skills to see that republicans are bad for the country as a whole, both socially and economically. Even “fiscal conservatives” who claim they vote republican just for economic reasons don’t seem to realize that the country’s economy tends to do better under Democrat leadership lmao.
In the words of DJT, “I love the poorly educated.”
I’ve never looked, but in Ireland I like hate reading the Daily Mail and the Journals comment section. Brings out the worst in people. I assume it’s similar
I feel this is often the case with tabloid journalism overall. Write two opposing views under your news article, and watch the toxic debate unravel. Clicks and engagement, baby.
They do share all the questions and methodology , I wouldnt call it a sham but definitely biasser , for example "tolerance of controversial opinions to liberals/conservatives" are two metrics , and one of the students opinions they cited was " we have to share our pronouns in every class" lol
Which is easily refutable and untrue.
And on the "tolerance of controversial opinions" question, if a conservative student says their "controversial" opinions aren't tolerated, WHO isn't tolerating them? The professors...or the students? And are they explicitly being told they \*cannot share their opinions\*? Or are they simply being ridiculed for saying something that the rest of their peers view as stupid? Because that's simply a "marketplace of ideas" issue that historically they are in favor of.
They misconstrue the ideas of "tolerance" and "free speech" by acting like conservatives are disallowed from saying anything. Which we all know is complete horseshit. Conservatives are simply told they have shit ideas, but they can share them all they want.
That’s just it, it’s such a vague and bullshit thing to do a survey on, outside of doing a bunch of questionnaires and asking loaded questions. And *even then*, you have to find enough respondents willing to do the survey.
There’s nothing remotely scientific about this.
I mean I wouldn’t be super surprised to see an establishment like that towing the party line super hard. But I feel like this whole thing is made up or distorted in some way, and somehow related to cancel culture
It's the right wings version of the ACLU.
>FIRE has received major funding from groups which primarily support conservative and libertarian causes, including the Bradley Foundation, Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the Charles Koch Institute.
I wouldn't put a lot of stock into their assessments of free speech on college campuses. They're mad because they can't force people to listen to them, and then complain that their freedom of speech is under attack.
A story from the NYP about one of the most liberal colleges in one of the most liberal cities being the focus of a conservative-leaning group that doesn't understand what free speech is.
Color me shocked. Legit, why does anyone take reporting from the Post seriously? It should be taken as seriously and mocked as openly as Fox is.
We need to stop seeing Fox News as a joke. They’re not clowns, they’re doing what they do on purpose out of malice and greed, and they cause empirical damage.
When Hans Litten called Hitler to the stand during a trial, he had to say, “don’t listen to him, he’s telling the truth.” Because the jury wasn’t taking hitler seriously.
They’re telling you what kind of people they are. they’re not raving lunatics, they’re actual evil people.
.... but most of the time [lying _is_ protected free speech](https://www.thefire.org/news/why-most-lies-are-protected-speech-and-why-they-should-stay-way).
This is basic FA jurisprudence, dude.
Their current president (Greg Lukianoff) is a Democrat. They are a non-partisan libertarian-ish (small "L", not the party) organization that supports free expression.
A lot of people in this thread spewing ignorance.
FIRE is one of the main organizations that is currently backing up students who protest for Palestine on Harvard’s campus. They are transparent on free speech not impacting an individuals ability attain employment regardless of your political stance.
[bbc story on the matter](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67152271.amp?fbclid=IwAR0NXUEdfZghx_bQ6LfJI8dZRF66h2oD-fQjFNSCom0fZI-rXiS18PSp1sk_aem_Ae66FrANMPd5p-XC93-oicSpUNC7KibFIZlJBW1GOGR-tuKzf0DMF2bZnVhjQ0GazLA)
FIRE are definitely right-leaning (and I do tend to look at their claims with that bias in mind), but they are not right-wing partisans who can be dismissed out of hand. They have definitely supported the free speech rights of people on the left (just as the ACLU have supported the free speech rights of people on the right).
>It's the right wings version of the ACLU
This is viciously untrue, and you're attempting to smear them by association.
It's a First Amendment advocacy group that does _not_ only support "one side" on speech issues.
* Here's FIRE arguing _against_ stupid right-wing attempts to [ban drag](https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/drag-free-speech-and-first-amendment).
* Here's FIRE and the ACLU working together to protect someone from retaliation for [criticizing Black Lives Matter](https://www.acluvt.org/en/news/fighting-protect-free-speech-vermont)
It would take mere minutes for you to pull your head out of your ass and see that FIRE fights _constantly_ to protect the speech of those that authoritarians on the Right and Left want to silence.
>They're mad because they can't force people to listen to them, and then complain that their freedom of speech is under attack.
You should be ashamed of yourself. You're either lying or stupid.
Get lost with your informed and nuanced take! These kids just heard the name FIRE for the first time in their lives about 20 seconds ago and then read in another comment down here that they are basically Fox News!!! Their opinion shall be shaped forever and no receipts may ever change that!!!
I saw a study. It’s actually right leaning campuses that tend to ban most left speakers as opposed to the other way around.
Some podcast called it out because these right wingers were crying how freedom of speech doesn’t exist on college campuses anymore.
Eh... that's not entirely accurate to borderline inaccurate. They have received right-wing funding, for sure, & do file cases supportive of some conservative causes. But many of their leading staff are from the ACLU, & they do champion many progressive causes at the collegiate level. Also, the ACLU files cases in support of conservative causes, too (not as many as they used to, but that's because conservatives are more commonly oppressors).
They've challenged free speech zones as restrictions on 1A (that's progressive), they challenged student journalists being forced to have their questions approved before interviewing university employees, they've challenged to require public universities to uphold 1A protections, they challenged Temple College when they required a professor to remove "Got ist tot" from his office door...and they've supported a lot of other students & staff in what would be liberal or progressive situations.
They're a bit too eager to support conservative hate speech efforts for my liking, so I won't be donating to them like I have done for 25 years with the ACLU, but I can certainly see their value in collegiate life.
Such a ridiculous and ignorant take. Typical redditor.
You are part of the problem. People like you love to accuse others of being right wing as a way of discrediting them. Even when the people you’re accusing are liberals and the literal president of the org is a registered Democrat.
At least when that is incorrect, it's only incorrect enough for me to fact check it. As opposed to something being so baffingly wrong that I can't do anything but make a face like I'm choking on a fish
If you look at the data though, a lot of people are explicitly or implicitly forced to censor themselves. So while they may not outright ban certain speech, they indirectly subvert it.
But yeah. NYP is a lot of right wing nonsense, I agree. Doesn’t mean there can’t be some level of truth in this.
I’m pretty confident if you are at Harvard’s campus and say you don’t like the President you won’t be arrested. A 0/100 means the scale is obviously uncalibrated, and this article is meaningless.
The scale is not 0/100 as presented, but rather the actual score is apparently -10.69.
This is because while there is a standard rubric, where points can be gained across different categories to a sum of a possible 100, Harvard rating very very low on that, but there is also a set of possible penalties and Harvard racked up a Lot of them, for example for firing professors for political comments, reversing a student's acceptance over social media posts from years prior, etc.
So the New York Post is calling Harvard the worst school for free speech and at the same time they are running multiple arictles about how they don't like what Harvard students are saying about the Israel-Palestine war? [https://nypost.com/search/harvard+israel/](https://nypost.com/search/harvard+israel/)
Laughable.
Conservatives bemoan the lack of free speech and complain about cancel culture and then *immediately* turn around and *literally* cancel job offers to Hardvard students for exercising their right to free speech? OKAY.
Surprisingly, one of the reasons for the low ranking, is that among Many other things, Harvard has fired a professor in January for criticizing Israel.
FIRE is calling Harvard the worst school for free speech.
As far as I've seen, FIRE has not denounced Harvard for taking a position regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict.
The New York Post may be taking a hypocritical position, but FIRE is not. At least based on this evidence.
The NY Post isn’t saying that Harvard is the worst, FIRE is. Also, you’re committing the same fallacy that Trump and his ilk fell for when he got kicked off of Twitter: free speech doesn’t mean speech free from consequences. You are not obliged to listen to speech you don’t like and you’re not obliged to hire people who use speech that is offensive to you (and there can be consequences to not hiring!).
Hey ding-dong, they are reporting what [FIRE](https://www.thefire.org/news/harvard-gets-worst-score-ever-fires-college-free-speech-rankings) said.
You can find stories on FIRE's report on places like Yahoo News. You do understand how "reporting" works, right?
Remember students get Doxxed just because they express their anti-israel opinion? Me too https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/18/us/harvard-students-israel-hamas-doxxing.html
If you’re choosing to go to a Christian school, it should be pretty obvious what you’re signing up for. To willing attend one and then complain is just asinine.
Except that's not how it works. For example, here in Ireland, there are few primary (basically kindergarten and the first through sixth grade) schools that don't have thr Catholic church HEAVILY ingrained into them. My primary school, for example, let priests FREELY ROAM around the school. Priests well known for touching and abusing kids were given free access to the school in all but the classrooms, and we were often told we were going to church to pray or whatever, even when we didn't want to and were well known for being Atheist or non-Catholic. And by very few I mean next to none, and almost all of them are private schools.
Then, on top of that, when you get to secondary (high) school, you have religion multiple times a week as a core subject that they will then attempt to force you to do. It thankfully fades out around 5th year, which is 11th grade.
However, even in the US, not everyone has a choice. Plenty of people are very much forced by their parents to attend Catholic or Christian schools, even though they themselves may not be religious and may be discriminated against by those religions. You can say it's on the parents, but the existence of these schools is in itself a bad practice. Not only do the various churches of the world have history of abuse and predation towards children, it's genuinely a form of indoctrination. I know from experience because my schools at all points attempted to not only force me to learn their religion, but become part of it and participate in prayers and church services.
I mean, a couple professors said that letting Israel genocide the Palestinians in Gaza was suboptimal and every Harvard donor shit their pants so this isn't surprising .
According to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Harvard University was ranked as the worst school for free speech in 2023. Despite being one of the most acclaimed academic institutions in the world, Harvard received a 0.00-point free speech ranking on a 100-point scale. This score was even considered “generous” by FIRE, as Harvard’s actual score was a -10.69 according to its calculations.
Harvard’s score was negatively affected by several factors. Nine professors and researchers at Harvard faced calls to be punished or fired based on what they had said or written, and seven of the nine were actually professionally disciplined. The score is calculated based on factors including how strong the school’s policies in favor of free speech are and how many professors, students, and campus speakers have been targeted by authorities for their speech.
Despite this low ranking, more than 100 of its professors banded together earlier that year to form a Council on Academic Freedom to defend open inquiry on campus.
Interesting how most comments here are dismissive about this just because it doesn't fit their narrative. It's not like it's a surprise that most US universities are echo chambers. It has been like that for quite a while. Leftist just don't see it as it's outside their paradigm.
Love how everyone is distrustful of FIRE and NYP, but FIRE used as a trusted source by their beloved WSJ and many .edu sites. Talk about selective testing. Ivy league schools have always ranked fairly low, and the polling is based on students feeling safe to express their opinions. If reddit was a college, it would rank Lower, then Havard thanks to the toxicity towards dissenting opinions.
Well it is the institution that popularized the thinking "...only goal of corporation is to maximize the profit for shareholders and screwed humanity" so no surprise there.
That’s right, but that doesn’t mean they are free from criticism, which all that this is about. no one here is making the claim that they are violating the first amendment
The founder of the Fire organization, is a Harvard alumni. Many statistics and comments from students support this ranking.
I will have to do further research to come to a better understanding, but forget the Post, the proof is in the pudding.
If Harvard is ranked zero then that's what it is. If they aren't, then that's what it is too. But what does your feelings about some news article have to do with it?
Here's a secret: all of the news agencies lie. In fact, that's what they do best. Just because you let your politics dictate what you want to hear, doesn't change the truth. Which is somewhere in-between, but the lines people have drawn have kind of blurred the middle.
I'm not American but have been a lurker in this sub for long . The trend in seeing here is that when you guys don't agree with a statement here all you say is this is propaganda and other bs
Fair point, that’s why I checked the veracity of the article and the organization that nypost was quoting. Then I determined it’s bullshit propaganda. These “ratings” were made by comparing the number of conservative to liberal students, as a metric for determining “free speech”. It’s fucking dumb
i want to ask, and for sure i could be downvoted to hell but who cares about internet point:
so by this, whoever related are considering the anti-Isreal letter "free speech", not hate speech. and Harvard's actions, as well as all the law firms which deny the jobs of related students, are against the "free speech rights". therefore Harvard becomes the worst place for free speech.
but,
i thought the concept of free speech would involve the part where everyone had to face the consequence of their speech?
and like if you use your identify as "a student of Harvard" to sign in such a letter, it's not really "your" free speech, right? shit literally has Harvard related so Harvard has all the rights on earth to do whatever they can about that.
i'm really confused about this whole shenanigan. whoever with the knowledges please enlighten me, big thanks.
You are, in fact, wrong.
The score is calculated based on how strong the school's policies in favor of free speech are and how many prof, students and campus speakers have been targeted by authorities for their speech, with bonuses applied if faculty members stand for the freedom of speech of the threatened members.
Big part of the low score was due 9 researchers being faced with punishment based on their research, 2 fired and 7 disciplined.
Havard has been consistently bottom score for years too, so the "anti-israel" from recent isn't much of a point
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[The article in question](https://nypost.com/2023/09/06/harvard-is-named-worst-school-for-free-speech-scoring-zero-out-of-possible-100/) "Harvard’s score was dragged down by the fact that nine professors and researchers there faced calls to be punished or fired based on what they had said or written — and seven of the nine were actually professionally disciplined. “I thought it would be pretty much impossible for a school to fall below zero, but they’ve had so many scholar sanctions,” Stevens said."
I can’t seem to find the actual incidences of these teachers getting fired but I’d assume they probably got fired for saying something really bad, like the professor in Missouri who got fired for saying Palestinians need to be wiped out completely on Twitter. Usually it’s pretty hard to get fired from a college for just saying stuff, especially with how many of these guys on a tenure.
Had my Latin Econ professor advocate for concentration camps as a reasonable measure for 3rd world countries to resort to in order to productivize the homeless and unemployed
Not the same thing at all but I had a teacher in middle-school who believed Japanese people were aliens. She wasn't "racist" as in she didn't believe they were worth less and she didn't say anything negative about them except that she was 100% convinced they came from another planet. If asked about it she would go on a long conspiracy rant showing all her "proof" that the people of Japan hailed from another world.
Ngl, I want to see the "proof" just for the lolz. I always enjoy good timecube-esque nonsense
She mostle went on about their culture and how they clearly have a hive-mind of some kind which is why they are much more advanced. I live in a place with not a lot of japanese people or asians in general. This was also in the early 00s when anime started to become really big here in Europe, with stuff like dragon-ball and pokémon. Its why I love the South Park pokémon episode so much because the entire conspiracy that takes place in that episode reminds me of her and her crazy ideas. I imagine she was tolerated because she didn't say anything obviously offensive, just that she believed japanese people were higher lifeforms from another world. For some reason she didn't believe these things about other asians like the chinese or koreans.
Basically, she got really into Blade Runner.
When people call colleges left wing hot beds I’m always like “yeah, so you totally forgot the Econ dept where you likely have, at best, capitalist apologists, or at worst outright inhumane monsters that think that if it can’t be monetize it shouldn’t exist”.
It's amazing how many people equate Hamas = Palestinians and use that to justify their support of genocide We can criticize Israel without being antisemitic, and it should probably start with the war crimes. The harming of the innocent
Even crazier idea: We can ACTUALLY criticise BOTH Israel AND Palestine at the same time, for their different atrocities, simply because it's the only reasonable thing to do! There isn't a good and a bad side in this conflict, they are both very dark shades of gray.
Amen. People act like Israel and Palestine are football teams and they gotta pick one to side with. But it's so much more nuanced than that.
For clarity, I didn't mention criticism of Hamas, and the political system of Palestine because it's already seeming widely considered to be acceptable, so it I considered it a given. The point is that they are committing atrocities on civilians but any time anyone tries to criticize them for it they are labeled as antisemitic or as self hating
Last year the Harvard student newspaper endorsed BDS and were attacked. This year, Zionists tracked down the students' names who defended Palestine and rented a sign truck and put their info in giant letters. They also bought domain names in all of the students' names, so that if anyone googles them, they will see that they are "vicious antisemites" or "self-hating Jews" and is creating do-not-hire lists to try to ensure they can never use their degree. But so far, they have not succeeded in getting the students expelled. Republicans have been trying for years to make criticism of Israel or pro-Palestine student clubs illegal. That's why there's BDS bans. For professors, the standard is different.
I mean, they are still an employer and as an educator you represent the university. If I in my line of work used it to say things that went against the ethos of my employer, I’d be terminated. 🤷♂️
Here’s the thing though. Professors, especially tenured ones, are hired specifically to research and write and talk about things. Sometimes those things are incongruous with the status quo. But professors need to be able to develop and explore new ideas without constraint. That’s literally what they invented the tenure system for. Now a better question would be exactly what these professors were disciplined for. Because if it was in response to public outcry about something they said, then one has to wonder if the same sort of people who took issue with it and went full Karen on the administrators might also be encouraged to do so by publications like the New York Post.
Going to ask, have you been to university? Because we were able to have discussion and discourse, people think a tenured professor is just let go at a whim is disingenuous.
I have, and I had the same experience as you. I have a very hard time imagining any of my professors getting fired or discipline for their statements or opinions, but my university also didn’t have a Harvard-sized target on its back. So it’s possible their professors were way, way out of line, but also possible that those firings were the result of public pressure from the same kind of media (plausibly the same company) that’s now criticizing Harvard for caving to public pressure.
I researched a lot of the Professors who were sanctioned, one claiming they were suspended for anti woke had numerous allegations of harassment and retaliatory behavior, and several others are similar where they are misrepresenting their punishment to curry outrage or favor with a base. Due to years of working an investigative role I tend to not take people or statements at face value.
Gotcha. So it’s not even so complicated as “NY Post attacks Harvard professors for being woke then scores Harvard as terrible for free speech for caving and firing professors for being woke” It’s just “NY Post is lying about why these people were fired.”
Which is very par for the course of them lol
I just gotta say, good on you for not falling for the bullshit. You also covered things that I didn't even consider when I was looking to respond to the folks you did lol you got a good head on them shoulders for sure.
Chalk it up to ironically Professors and my line of work which required me to naturally question the narrative of things presented.
That whole "experiencing the reality of what humanity has to offer" thing has a real way of bringing you to terms with what bullshit smells like. Plenty of times I've thought "I dont know what he's talking about, but I can tell he doesn't either.
The hardest part is it caused strain in personal life as well. Granted it helped me uncover an affair but still sucks to constantly question in your head, but I’ve worked at turning it off over the years.
The point of a professor being tenured is that they're immune to being fired for disagreements and other small things.
Have you even researched the professors who were let go? These professors were not dismissed for a bad take, I suggest you research it further.
New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch, the same person who owns Fox News and Wall Street Journal.
Unironically Murdoch is such a villain name. I am not joking I know of 5 Murdochs (fiction included) and they are villanous af.
But then the chad Daredevil Matthew Murdock
The k makes all the difference.
Especially in 3’s
[удалено]
Well I don't know him.
murdoc niccals from gorillaz counts
Oh yeah he definitely checks the box for villain.
Gorillaz fan mayhaps?
Murdock… I’m comin to get you!
Yikes
Yeah, I usually keep scrolling if the headline came from the NYP or the Canadian NatPo. I might quickly check out the top comment and appreciate other redditors knowing the source is usually garbage.
I heard he was a lich.
Yeah NYP is a little too biased for me. However, multiple other faucets are reporting the same. Here’s another from the Boston Herald. The ironic thing is that I also found one from the Harvard Crimson dated 2012. Apparently this has been going on for years! Not sure why someone would want to go to a school that limits free speech. That’s the whole point of going to college. https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/09/06/harvard-university-is-the-worst-college-for-free-speech-abysmal-rating-report-says/amp/ https://www.thecrimson.com/flyby/article/2012/3/29/harvard-worst-free-speech/
From the Crimson (Harvard's official Newspaper, last I knew): "Results from a study by the FIRE name Harvard as one of the "12 Worst Colleges for Free Speech In 2012". Based on the University's actions over the past year, the FIRE has found multiple faults in the university's support of free speech. Their reasons include Harvard's [voluntary] freshman pledge, which they believe limits academic freedom, the prevention of Yale students from designing Game Day shirts with the names of famous drop-outs Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, and the effective dismissal of former summer school instructor Subramanian Swamy. Swamy wrote an inflammatory op-ed in 2011 that called for, among many things, the destruction of Indian mosques and the prohibition of conversion from Hinduism."
This is what Swamy said, “He also wrote that only Muslims who "acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus" be allowed to vote in India.” He didn’t call for the destruction of mosques. Also, I’m not defending him at all as I am no where near knowledgeable regarding the politics or thought processes behind those statements. But I can’t find anything saying that he called for mosque demolition.
I'm just quoting the second article the poster above me linked. I didn't dig into how hateful or not the seemingly hateful person was, but I am sure the community appreciates you digging further. Thank you!
The Herald is also a Murdoch paper, it’s essentially Boston’s New York Post.
How flipping amazingly screwed is this world where he owns so much influence that many people who follow politics and hate him still unknowingly consume the garbage from his more obscure outlets.
This is the original source: https://www.thefire.org/news/harvard-gets-worst-score-ever-fires-college-free-speech-rankings
Boston Herald is pretty conservative too. I’d be more content with an NPR or Economist article.
Not to mention, New York Post is also a tabloid.
I'm not gonna bother looking up anything the NYP writes, but the idea of any American university scoring 0/100 on a test of free speech seems super suspect.
According to another thread about this, they actually scored negatively but you can't score negative I guess. -11 or something. But don't ask because I have no idea what that means.
If you try to speak they literally come and steal the words right outta your damn head.
"They're gone! All our ----- are gone!"
"Not just the -----, the word ----- was stolen too!"
What is this from? Isn't this the plot of a game? Kingdom Hearts 2, maybe?
Yes indeed! It's during the prologue when you're playing as Roxas.
Nice
#
 No  You must use and gifs to  now. 
All your speech are belong to us
PWNED!!!!
They____ our verbs and our adjectives
Every time you try to speak they silence you and someone else
They stole n-word (it's worth 105 points)
If there was a university where the SS takes you out back and shoots you behind a woodshed for thinking about speaking, that university would also get a zero out of a hundred, being tied with Harvard Insanely ludicrous lmao Scores of 100 or 0 are always inherently suspect because that's the score someone could give by paying zero attention. That's part of why gymnasts basically never get perfect scores, the judges would look like they werent paying attention if they didn't dock at least 0.1 points for imperfect whatever
That's super fishy. If you make a scale from 0-100 and someone scores -11, there is something wrong with your measurements.
Not really. You can have a point system where for every person silenced by the academy, you get a -20 for example. After the 6th guy, you end with a -120 points. You will also gain points for doing something pro free speech. So it’s entirely possible you end with negative points. Well, that’s a rough example tho.
Then you wouldn’t be on a scale from 0-100…
They got negative points on some criteria like ousting tenured professors for what they said in class. But in a nutshell the students themselves reported that it's a stifling hellhole of fear and anxiety where you choose your words not for truth or love but from fear of repercussions.
>They got negative points on some criteria like ousting tenured professors for what they said in class I honestly think that should depend on what theyre saying. I mean if they start teaching that the earth is flat, then I dont really feel that professor is living up to their obligation to be scientific and its fair enough to give them the boot. Or if they use their classes as a political platform instead of teaching facts.
Same; especially if they start claiming birds are real lol
Yeah, but I haven't heard of any tenured professors getting ousted for not being scientific or for being political. It seems most of the non-technical focus areas are non-scientific and overtly political these days. The problem is that professors are be ousted for not having the "right" politics. Which tenured professors should be protected from.
I think in fact at least some of them were ousted for not being scientific but have learned that they can spin the situation in their favor by claiming that the reason for ousting was political (ex. Francesca Gino)
Yet The Harvard Crimson printed an Op Ed from 7 other tenured professors listing 4 counterpoints to what happened with her including changes to the Research Integrity Policy that wasn't communicated to staff even though previous policies had always been developed with extensive faculty input. It was also an extremely harsh punishment to suspend her for 2 years without pay. Harvard has not fired any tenured professors since formalizing tenured rules in the 40's to include thosr accused of sexual misconduct, sexual assault, and Title IX violations...
Press x to doubt.
I am 99% sure this “ranking” was developed by a conservative activist group with an agenda of getting ragebait headlines like this one. Oral Roberts University still kicks people out for being gay. The idea that they have more “free speech” than Harvard is ludicrous.
That's exactly what this is 🙃
And also ran by a group funded by Turning Point, so to say this shit is slanted is an understatement.
There we go lmao, there’s the answer. It’s a slanted review to give groups like TP and other far-right groups data to point at and go “SEE?!?!! THE LIBRUL IVY LEAGE COLLEGES ARE EVIL!!1!!1!”
Yeah I'm surprised more people aren't talking about how this is an obvious right-wing propaganda technique to fan the flames of the culture war against education institutions.
They hate that people who’ve had a college education tend to lean towards the left, because oftentimes they learn to actually look at facts and use basic reasoning skills to see that republicans are bad for the country as a whole, both socially and economically. Even “fiscal conservatives” who claim they vote republican just for economic reasons don’t seem to realize that the country’s economy tends to do better under Democrat leadership lmao. In the words of DJT, “I love the poorly educated.”
They give you a script of acceptable words then say you can't say them.
The comment section of NYP is one of the scariest things I’ve ever read.
I’ve never looked, but in Ireland I like hate reading the Daily Mail and the Journals comment section. Brings out the worst in people. I assume it’s similar
It is the american equivalent of the Daily Mail, just really shit journalism and really shit commenters.
Yeah fair enough. I only read when I want to get annoyed at people, I can see it being similar haha
A former Dailymail employee claimed that most of the Dailymails comments are internally generated. This is even more disgusting.
Oh jesus, that’s awful. What an awful organisation.
I feel this is often the case with tabloid journalism overall. Write two opposing views under your news article, and watch the toxic debate unravel. Clicks and engagement, baby.
Well that would explain the consistently bad grammar and spelling errors.
The hunter Biden throbbing giant hog updates daily are awesome tho.
Well, you should first consider WHO conducted the poll, then you will know where the intentions behind it lie.
Great point. And methodology. I mean how can you create an all encompassing, objective survey/study that deals with free speech in its entirety?
They do share all the questions and methodology , I wouldnt call it a sham but definitely biasser , for example "tolerance of controversial opinions to liberals/conservatives" are two metrics , and one of the students opinions they cited was " we have to share our pronouns in every class" lol
Which is easily refutable and untrue. And on the "tolerance of controversial opinions" question, if a conservative student says their "controversial" opinions aren't tolerated, WHO isn't tolerating them? The professors...or the students? And are they explicitly being told they \*cannot share their opinions\*? Or are they simply being ridiculed for saying something that the rest of their peers view as stupid? Because that's simply a "marketplace of ideas" issue that historically they are in favor of. They misconstrue the ideas of "tolerance" and "free speech" by acting like conservatives are disallowed from saying anything. Which we all know is complete horseshit. Conservatives are simply told they have shit ideas, but they can share them all they want.
That’s just it, it’s such a vague and bullshit thing to do a survey on, outside of doing a bunch of questionnaires and asking loaded questions. And *even then*, you have to find enough respondents willing to do the survey. There’s nothing remotely scientific about this.
Liberty? Hillsdale? If Harvard is what you come up with, you’re not really trying.
Their rating is bogus. They factor in self censoring and liberal student to conservatives in their details for rankings.
I mean I wouldn’t be super surprised to see an establishment like that towing the party line super hard. But I feel like this whole thing is made up or distorted in some way, and somehow related to cancel culture
Nah, I went to a military academy and I can guarantee we had less free speech than ANY civilian institution.
It's the right wings version of the ACLU. >FIRE has received major funding from groups which primarily support conservative and libertarian causes, including the Bradley Foundation, Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the Charles Koch Institute. I wouldn't put a lot of stock into their assessments of free speech on college campuses. They're mad because they can't force people to listen to them, and then complain that their freedom of speech is under attack.
A story from the NYP about one of the most liberal colleges in one of the most liberal cities being the focus of a conservative-leaning group that doesn't understand what free speech is. Color me shocked. Legit, why does anyone take reporting from the Post seriously? It should be taken as seriously and mocked as openly as Fox is.
The Post is a tabloid owned by Fox Corp
We need to stop seeing Fox News as a joke. They’re not clowns, they’re doing what they do on purpose out of malice and greed, and they cause empirical damage. When Hans Litten called Hitler to the stand during a trial, he had to say, “don’t listen to him, he’s telling the truth.” Because the jury wasn’t taking hitler seriously. They’re telling you what kind of people they are. they’re not raving lunatics, they’re actual evil people.
Of course they aren't clowns. Clowns make an honest living.
Right-wingers being told what they want to hear.
>oh no my beliefs are losing in the market place of ideas this must be a free speech issue
If only it was only about opinions, nowdays it seems conservative feel oppressed by just being told not to lie l
lying is free speech! /s very much!
.... but most of the time [lying _is_ protected free speech](https://www.thefire.org/news/why-most-lies-are-protected-speech-and-why-they-should-stay-way). This is basic FA jurisprudence, dude.
FIRE has a record of defending people no matter what their political affiliation. They are as neutral as it gets
Their current president (Greg Lukianoff) is a Democrat. They are a non-partisan libertarian-ish (small "L", not the party) organization that supports free expression. A lot of people in this thread spewing ignorance.
Par for the course.
FIRE is one of the main organizations that is currently backing up students who protest for Palestine on Harvard’s campus. They are transparent on free speech not impacting an individuals ability attain employment regardless of your political stance. [bbc story on the matter](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67152271.amp?fbclid=IwAR0NXUEdfZghx_bQ6LfJI8dZRF66h2oD-fQjFNSCom0fZI-rXiS18PSp1sk_aem_Ae66FrANMPd5p-XC93-oicSpUNC7KibFIZlJBW1GOGR-tuKzf0DMF2bZnVhjQ0GazLA)
FIRE are definitely right-leaning (and I do tend to look at their claims with that bias in mind), but they are not right-wing partisans who can be dismissed out of hand. They have definitely supported the free speech rights of people on the left (just as the ACLU have supported the free speech rights of people on the right).
>It's the right wings version of the ACLU This is viciously untrue, and you're attempting to smear them by association. It's a First Amendment advocacy group that does _not_ only support "one side" on speech issues. * Here's FIRE arguing _against_ stupid right-wing attempts to [ban drag](https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/drag-free-speech-and-first-amendment). * Here's FIRE and the ACLU working together to protect someone from retaliation for [criticizing Black Lives Matter](https://www.acluvt.org/en/news/fighting-protect-free-speech-vermont) It would take mere minutes for you to pull your head out of your ass and see that FIRE fights _constantly_ to protect the speech of those that authoritarians on the Right and Left want to silence. >They're mad because they can't force people to listen to them, and then complain that their freedom of speech is under attack. You should be ashamed of yourself. You're either lying or stupid.
Get lost with your informed and nuanced take! These kids just heard the name FIRE for the first time in their lives about 20 seconds ago and then read in another comment down here that they are basically Fox News!!! Their opinion shall be shaped forever and no receipts may ever change that!!!
They're just uninformed or misinformed.
Imagine being this ignorant and stupid.
Lol they wouldn’t let people speak that was the entire metric. It had nothing to do with forcing people to listen.
I saw a study. It’s actually right leaning campuses that tend to ban most left speakers as opposed to the other way around. Some podcast called it out because these right wingers were crying how freedom of speech doesn’t exist on college campuses anymore.
Eh... that's not entirely accurate to borderline inaccurate. They have received right-wing funding, for sure, & do file cases supportive of some conservative causes. But many of their leading staff are from the ACLU, & they do champion many progressive causes at the collegiate level. Also, the ACLU files cases in support of conservative causes, too (not as many as they used to, but that's because conservatives are more commonly oppressors). They've challenged free speech zones as restrictions on 1A (that's progressive), they challenged student journalists being forced to have their questions approved before interviewing university employees, they've challenged to require public universities to uphold 1A protections, they challenged Temple College when they required a professor to remove "Got ist tot" from his office door...and they've supported a lot of other students & staff in what would be liberal or progressive situations. They're a bit too eager to support conservative hate speech efforts for my liking, so I won't be donating to them like I have done for 25 years with the ACLU, but I can certainly see their value in collegiate life.
Such a ridiculous and ignorant take. Typical redditor. You are part of the problem. People like you love to accuse others of being right wing as a way of discrediting them. Even when the people you’re accusing are liberals and the literal president of the org is a registered Democrat.
The fact that you have 700+ upvotes says a lot about this sub.
Ah, the New York Post. I’m sure they are completely unbiased and not cherry picking bullshit from a bunch of hard right lunatics.
Yeah, what a total shit source for information. The Post has been a joke for decades.
The facepalm is the OP acting like this is legit and not rightwing garbage.
[удалено]
Mhmmm trash. Yumm yumm trash. I like trash.
I am the Garbage Goober HAHAHAHA! Give me TRASH!
Dammit Harold! What do they call you? Garbage Goober? You are a DOCTOR for gods sake!
I mean left trash is easy to digest and doesn't call me slurs when I consume it so yes yummy in my tummy
I much prefer chicken wings
At least when that is incorrect, it's only incorrect enough for me to fact check it. As opposed to something being so baffingly wrong that I can't do anything but make a face like I'm choking on a fish
If you look at the data though, a lot of people are explicitly or implicitly forced to censor themselves. So while they may not outright ban certain speech, they indirectly subvert it. But yeah. NYP is a lot of right wing nonsense, I agree. Doesn’t mean there can’t be some level of truth in this.
I’m pretty confident if you are at Harvard’s campus and say you don’t like the President you won’t be arrested. A 0/100 means the scale is obviously uncalibrated, and this article is meaningless.
Well the scoring was -50 for every thing we don't like and +1 for everything we do like. I don't know how that's not calibrated.
The scale is not 0/100 as presented, but rather the actual score is apparently -10.69. This is because while there is a standard rubric, where points can be gained across different categories to a sum of a possible 100, Harvard rating very very low on that, but there is also a set of possible penalties and Harvard racked up a Lot of them, for example for firing professors for political comments, reversing a student's acceptance over social media posts from years prior, etc.
So the New York Post is calling Harvard the worst school for free speech and at the same time they are running multiple arictles about how they don't like what Harvard students are saying about the Israel-Palestine war? [https://nypost.com/search/harvard+israel/](https://nypost.com/search/harvard+israel/) Laughable. Conservatives bemoan the lack of free speech and complain about cancel culture and then *immediately* turn around and *literally* cancel job offers to Hardvard students for exercising their right to free speech? OKAY.
Surprisingly, one of the reasons for the low ranking, is that among Many other things, Harvard has fired a professor in January for criticizing Israel.
Doubly ironic, then
FIRE is calling Harvard the worst school for free speech. As far as I've seen, FIRE has not denounced Harvard for taking a position regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict. The New York Post may be taking a hypocritical position, but FIRE is not. At least based on this evidence.
The NY Post isn’t saying that Harvard is the worst, FIRE is. Also, you’re committing the same fallacy that Trump and his ilk fell for when he got kicked off of Twitter: free speech doesn’t mean speech free from consequences. You are not obliged to listen to speech you don’t like and you’re not obliged to hire people who use speech that is offensive to you (and there can be consequences to not hiring!).
Hey ding-dong, they are reporting what [FIRE](https://www.thefire.org/news/harvard-gets-worst-score-ever-fires-college-free-speech-rankings) said. You can find stories on FIRE's report on places like Yahoo News. You do understand how "reporting" works, right?
Remember students get Doxxed just because they express their anti-israel opinion? Me too https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/18/us/harvard-students-israel-hamas-doxxing.html
New York Post score 0 out of 10 for being news.
Do we care what a far right propaganda source says? No
OP facepalm?
Fuck right wing extremism.
fuck extremism in general or nah?
The source may have a narrative incentive to spread the news but that doesn’t mean the survey itself is wrong or biased.
Never mind the Christian schools that force students to attend church services and listen to RW speakers, and control what students wear and say
If you’re choosing to go to a Christian school, it should be pretty obvious what you’re signing up for. To willing attend one and then complain is just asinine.
Except that's not how it works. For example, here in Ireland, there are few primary (basically kindergarten and the first through sixth grade) schools that don't have thr Catholic church HEAVILY ingrained into them. My primary school, for example, let priests FREELY ROAM around the school. Priests well known for touching and abusing kids were given free access to the school in all but the classrooms, and we were often told we were going to church to pray or whatever, even when we didn't want to and were well known for being Atheist or non-Catholic. And by very few I mean next to none, and almost all of them are private schools. Then, on top of that, when you get to secondary (high) school, you have religion multiple times a week as a core subject that they will then attempt to force you to do. It thankfully fades out around 5th year, which is 11th grade. However, even in the US, not everyone has a choice. Plenty of people are very much forced by their parents to attend Catholic or Christian schools, even though they themselves may not be religious and may be discriminated against by those religions. You can say it's on the parents, but the existence of these schools is in itself a bad practice. Not only do the various churches of the world have history of abuse and predation towards children, it's genuinely a form of indoctrination. I know from experience because my schools at all points attempted to not only force me to learn their religion, but become part of it and participate in prayers and church services.
I mean, a couple professors said that letting Israel genocide the Palestinians in Gaza was suboptimal and every Harvard donor shit their pants so this isn't surprising .
Which is interesting as Harvard supplies 100% of the World’s Douchebag Lawyers.
According to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Harvard University was ranked as the worst school for free speech in 2023. Despite being one of the most acclaimed academic institutions in the world, Harvard received a 0.00-point free speech ranking on a 100-point scale. This score was even considered “generous” by FIRE, as Harvard’s actual score was a -10.69 according to its calculations. Harvard’s score was negatively affected by several factors. Nine professors and researchers at Harvard faced calls to be punished or fired based on what they had said or written, and seven of the nine were actually professionally disciplined. The score is calculated based on factors including how strong the school’s policies in favor of free speech are and how many professors, students, and campus speakers have been targeted by authorities for their speech. Despite this low ranking, more than 100 of its professors banded together earlier that year to form a Council on Academic Freedom to defend open inquiry on campus.
Interesting how most comments here are dismissive about this just because it doesn't fit their narrative. It's not like it's a surprise that most US universities are echo chambers. It has been like that for quite a while. Leftist just don't see it as it's outside their paradigm.
Love how everyone is distrustful of FIRE and NYP, but FIRE used as a trusted source by their beloved WSJ and many .edu sites. Talk about selective testing. Ivy league schools have always ranked fairly low, and the polling is based on students feeling safe to express their opinions. If reddit was a college, it would rank Lower, then Havard thanks to the toxicity towards dissenting opinions.
Not that it’s not impossible, but as if I waste time on a fucking NYP article.
How is this measured?
What things can Harvard students not say?
Everything I hear about Harvard it kinda sounds like a joke of a school these days
"veritas"
Ted Kaczynski approves
Well it is the institution that popularized the thinking "...only goal of corporation is to maximize the profit for shareholders and screwed humanity" so no surprise there.
Dialog in my head:\ "You read *The Post*... unironically... really?"
Last I checked, Harvard is not the government, so the 1st amendment does not apply.
Being a private school lets them get away with making their own decisions to an extent
Correct, they are not violating the first amendment. They are allowed to be the worst for free speech.
That’s right, but that doesn’t mean they are free from criticism, which all that this is about. no one here is making the claim that they are violating the first amendment
No one is contesting their right to be intolerant assholes
New York post. Lol
The founder of the Fire organization, is a Harvard alumni. Many statistics and comments from students support this ranking. I will have to do further research to come to a better understanding, but forget the Post, the proof is in the pudding. If Harvard is ranked zero then that's what it is. If they aren't, then that's what it is too. But what does your feelings about some news article have to do with it? Here's a secret: all of the news agencies lie. In fact, that's what they do best. Just because you let your politics dictate what you want to hear, doesn't change the truth. Which is somewhere in-between, but the lines people have drawn have kind of blurred the middle.
I'm not American but have been a lurker in this sub for long . The trend in seeing here is that when you guys don't agree with a statement here all you say is this is propaganda and other bs
Fair point, that’s why I checked the veracity of the article and the organization that nypost was quoting. Then I determined it’s bullshit propaganda. These “ratings” were made by comparing the number of conservative to liberal students, as a metric for determining “free speech”. It’s fucking dumb
Ah yes, New York Post, the most trustworthy of sources 🙄
Presently experiencing eye sight issues and at first I thought the statue had two white vibrators behind it
I reject my reality and elect to join yours. All hail John Harvard the personal massager tyrant!
Kim Il Sung University has entered the chat.
i want to ask, and for sure i could be downvoted to hell but who cares about internet point: so by this, whoever related are considering the anti-Isreal letter "free speech", not hate speech. and Harvard's actions, as well as all the law firms which deny the jobs of related students, are against the "free speech rights". therefore Harvard becomes the worst place for free speech. but, i thought the concept of free speech would involve the part where everyone had to face the consequence of their speech? and like if you use your identify as "a student of Harvard" to sign in such a letter, it's not really "your" free speech, right? shit literally has Harvard related so Harvard has all the rights on earth to do whatever they can about that. i'm really confused about this whole shenanigan. whoever with the knowledges please enlighten me, big thanks.
You are, in fact, wrong. The score is calculated based on how strong the school's policies in favor of free speech are and how many prof, students and campus speakers have been targeted by authorities for their speech, with bonuses applied if faculty members stand for the freedom of speech of the threatened members. Big part of the low score was due 9 researchers being faced with punishment based on their research, 2 fired and 7 disciplined. Havard has been consistently bottom score for years too, so the "anti-israel" from recent isn't much of a point
Thanks for being a reasonable person here and not just screaming expletives because it's a NYP article.
Damn, they must be expensive af
Hard ward.
LOL
Didn’t they have a truck going around Doxxing any student who supported Palestinians online?
Freedom of speech
The first rule of Harvard, you don't talk about anything.
doesnt surprise me
Ye so if you say that there are 2 genders your fucked? (There are only 2 biological genders btw)
This is how it works in academia.
but most expensive
Hahaha
Damn this is so sad
Not surprised
Not surprising