Freshman Orientation: A Welcome Change on Free Speech

September 06, 2022 3 min read

By Stuart Taylor, Jr. and Edward Yingling

We have been quite critical of Princeton's orientation a year ago, which contained not one word about Princeton's robust free speech rule and in fact contained a section on racism at Princeton that suggested free speech is a tool for racists. We will not revisit those criticisms here.

Instead, now we celebrate the dramatic turn toward championing free speech in general and Princeton’s free speech rule in particular that took place during freshman orientation at McCarter Theater on September 1, and especially in the eloquent speech to the freshman class by Myles McKnight, President of the Princeton Open Campus Coalition. Nearly 2,000 enthusiastic students packed the auditorium. The text of McKnight’s speech, which was live-streamed to other freshmen in locations around the campus, is posted below and within.

“[T]hat the fight for free speech has become partisan is a true shame,” McKnight told the assembled students. “Free speech is neither a conservative nor a progressive value. It is a truth-seeking value. In the university context, it is an academic value––as deeply rooted in the identity of the University as anything could be. Just as you couldn’t have a university without scholarship, you couldn’t have a healthy scholarly culture without the opposition, open dissent, and vigorous argument that free speech protects.”

He added: “Formal protections for free speech are important, but the informal culture bearing on the expression of diverse points of view can be even more critical when the truth-seeking ideal is what’s at stake. Therefore, we should all celebrate our University’s formal adoption of the Chicago Free Speech Principles, which provide robust protections for expressive freedom and protect your rights as new members of this community to speak and write openly.”

We also welcome the support for free speech voiced in talks by President Eisgruber and Hannah Kapoor, Vice President of Undergraduate Student Government. Mr. Eisgruber said that even – indeed, “especially” -- when a listener feels offended by a speaker’s assertion, there is value in allowing it to be said.

"I want to start by calling your attention to the University’s statement on free expression,” Mr. Eisgruber said. “I hope that you will take the time to read it if you have not done so already.  Like the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, it provides broad freedom for students, faculty, and staff to state their opinions.

"Here, in part, is what the statement says: 'Because the University is committed to free and open inquiry in all matters, it guarantees all members of the University community the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn.. . . . that is a bold and powerful commitment.' "

McKnight and another senior, Abigail Anthony, were instrumental in encouraging the administration to have this positive free speech program. We are pleased to say that these students are currently serving in the two slots reserved for students on the PFS Board of Directors.

We have repeatedly assailed President Eisgruber’s past assertions that the free speech rule protects the supposed rights of his subordinates to use the University’s website and orientation to smear as racists professors with whom they disagree on racial issues. We very much hope that this year's orientation on free speech represents a turn for the better.

Indeed, the presentations on free speech and the reception that they received appear to be the most hopeful signs in recent memory that free speech is still alive at Princeton. We fervently hope that Princeton will make celebration of free speech a permanent part of freshman orientation and other campus events.


Leave a comment


Also in Princeton Free Speech News & Commentary

Multiple pro-Palestine demonstrations held in days leading up to Oct. 7, graffiti investigated

October 09, 2024 1 min read

Annie Rupertus, Nikki Han, and Miriam Waldvogel
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: Several pro-Palestine student organizations held sparsely attended demonstrations on campus on the days leading up to Monday, Oct. 7, which marks one year since Hamas’s attacks on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza.

While most of this week’s actions occurred near Firestone, some University employees arriving to work Monday morning were greeted by pro-Palestine graffiti at the entrance to 22 Chambers St., where the Princeton University Investment Company (PRINCO) is headquartered.
Read More
Commentary: When free speech isn’t free: Princeton’s suppression of low-income students

October 09, 2024 1 min read

Raf Basas
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: However, even as Princeton has undertaken proactive efforts to improve equity among FLI students, its punitive aid-related policies contradict and complicate this history. As stated in Princeton’s financial aid terms, students who “repeat a semester for disciplinary reasons” are not “eligible for a Princeton University grant for the repeated portion of the term.”

Princeton has already indicated its willingness to arrest students for exercising their right to free speech. By withholding the financial aid of suspended students, Princeton disproportionately suppresses the free speech of low-income students.
Read More
Trustees Opt to Keep Witherspoon Statue, Call For Campus Art Review

October 09, 2024 1 min read

Bill Hewitt ‘74
Princeton Alumni Weekly

Excerpt: The Board of Trustees’ recent decision regarding the John Witherspoon statue merits both praise and criticism. Their refusal to remove or alter the statue is commendable. Dedicated by predecessor trustees in 2001 to honor Witherspoon, the statue should remain unchanged, regardless of artistic considerations. Recent scholarship has provided a more favorable historical understanding of Witherspoon’s relationship with slavery than was available in 2001, further justifying this decision.

Regrettably, the Trustees erred in delegating the fate of the Witherspoon statue to the Campus Art Steering Committee. Any alteration of the statue would constitute a damnatio memoriae of Witherspoon. An ominous portent in the Committee on Naming report is the troubling conflation of judgments about Witherspoon’s historical relation to slavery with those about the statue’s artistic merit.
Read More