Mixed Bag: FIRE Reviews Sawicki Report

WILLIAMSTOWN, MA - Two reporters from FIRE have analyzed the Sawicki Report and found it to be a mix of helpful and doubtful elements. Generally kind to the report, FIRE staff praised its thoughtfulness and thoroughness. Like Jerry Coyne, however, they are concerned that certain aspects of the report's recommendations will be abused so that the report does little to protect freedom of speech.

...the report contains broad and vague language that could facilitate censorship in the future. At one point, the college declares that it is obligated to maintain “dignitary safety” on campus in the face of so called “hate speech,” defined as “the sense of being an equal member of the community and of being invited to contribute to a discussion as a valued participant.” This language sets up the inevitable clash between offensive – but protected – speech, and the college’s inclusion initiative.

In its recommendations, the report also suggests the college “should acknowledge harm,” an undefined, amorphous standard that could mean nearly anything in application. Such broad and vague language threatens free and open debate and could chill a wide range of expression.

Their final opinion seems to be that they are willing to wait and see how this turns out. They are looking forward to Maud Mandel's final statement on freedom of speech. The article is worth saving and reading, in part, because of its stunning review of how the school has been sacrificing freedom of speech to the on-campus mob.

John C. Drew, Ph.D., is a former Williams College professor in American politics and political economy. He contributes to American Thinker, Breitbart, Campus Reform, The College Fix, and WorldNetDaily.