Dissent: In Defense of Free Speech and In Opposition to BDS
Crimson | Jacob M. Miller ‘25
Miller argues that “The [Crimson] Board is wrong that administrators should curtail their own speech for the sake of editorial independence: Freedom of the press does not mean freedom from criticism. University presidents should be allowed to express their disagreement with student newspapers’ editorial stances, as long as they don’t actively censor what student newspapers write.”
Miller’s piece comes after the Crimson Editorial Board critiqued Wellesley President and Harvard alum Paula A. Johnson ’80 for her response to a Wellesley News editorial supporting the Mapping Project as “providing a vital service” while many see the organization as antisemitic and threatening to Jewish people (the Mapping Project publicly maps the location of MA organizations with alleged ties to what they call the “occupation” of Palestine—i.e. the addresses of Jewish organizations and names of their staffers, including universities, foundations, nonprofits, schools, and police departments).
The Crimson board claims that Johnson’s response, which criticized the Wellesley News editorial over its inclusion of the Mapping Project, did not take into account student safety and undermined freedom of the press.
Miller argues the Crimson’s critique of Johnson serves only to reveal intolerance. “Robust dialogue — both in the press and in speech — is what allows our society to weigh different ideas and consider the nuances of complicated problems, so we should welcome President Johnson’s statement instead of denouncing it. If our Board is willing to question a university president for merely disagreeing with students in an unthreatening manner, I am deeply concerned about the lack of debate on campus.”