Faculty survey reveals fear, self-censorship at US universities, especially about Israel
Newly released study polled 6,269 instructors at 55 major colleges and universities; four times as many report toning down their opinions compared to the McCarthy era
Luke Tress is The Times of Israel's New York correspondent.
NEW YORK — Faculty at US universities reported a climate of self-censorship and fear, particularly surrounding discourse about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in a survey released on Thursday.
The survey, titled “Silence in the Classroom,” was carried out by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, or FIRE, a nonprofit dedicated to free speech in the US.
The survey found that 23% of faculty viewed their departments as hostile toward people who held their political beliefs, and the same amount worried about being fired over a misunderstanding. Those concerns were higher among conservatives and moderates than liberals. Just 17% of liberal faculty hid their political views for job security, compared to 55% of conservatives.
At 35%, more than a third of respondents said they had toned down their writings to avoid controversy. The report said that figure was nearly four times higher than social scientists reported when asked the same question in 1954, during McCarthyism, an era infamous for suppression of free speech.
Faculty reported self-censoring in research, outside talks, classroom lectures and online.
“Instead of speaking openly and pursuing bold new ideas, many American faculty appear to keep their heads low and live in fear,” the report said.
The most difficult issue to have open and honest conversations about was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with 70% of faculty saying they were likely to self-censor on the topic. After the conflict, the most hot-button issues were racial inequality, transgender rights and affirmative action.
FIRE is a nonpartisan nonprofit based in Philadelphia that is not tied to Jewish or Israeli issues.
The survey queried 6,269 faculty at 55 four-year public and private colleges and universities in the US between March 4 and May 13. FIRE said it was the largest faculty survey ever conducted on the topic of free expression. The report did not include a margin of error.
At Columbia University, which has been rocked by anti-Israel protests since the October 7, 2023, invasion of Israel, 89% of faculty said the conflict was difficult to discuss, far higher than any other topic. More than half — 54% — said it was unclear that the administration protects free speech. Sixty-three percent said faculty could not express opinions, either sometimes or often, because of how others would respond, and more than a quarter had toned down something they wrote due to fears of controversy.
Most of Columbia’s faculty, 72%, was liberal; 15% was moderate; and 9% was conservative, with the rest identifying as “other.” The report surveyed 130 Columbia faculty.
“One doesn’t fear discipline so much as one fears being shadowbanned or placed on a blacklist. Everything happens through gossip and collusion,” a Columbia faculty member told the researchers.
That university told The Times of Israel on Wednesday that “Columbia remains committed to the principles of academic freedom and inclusive pluralism that define a great university.”
In a November statement, the interim university president, Katrina Armstrong, lauded the “academic freedom and open inquiry that are the bedrock of our university.”
At Harvard, 84% of respondents said the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was difficult to discuss, one-third said they had toned down their writing due to fears about controversy, and 72% supported adopting institutional neutrality.
The FIRE report said the findings were “emblematic of deeper issues” in academia as “ideological diversity within the academy continues to shrink.”
The report urged universities to adopt institutional neutrality on political and social issues, something that two-thirds of faculty supported.
“Freedom of speech is crucial in an academic setting because the open exchange of ideas is the best way we have of discerning what is true — and because when you silence speech for political reasons, you risk silencing facts that might just be politically incorrect,” the report said.
