How is that stifling free speech? They aren't getting arrested or losing rights as a citizen.

 

They're mad because the policy is vague. It all stems from the professor at KU tweeting that he wished violence on children of NRA members following the death of 13 people in DC at the Navy Yard. He was put on leave and eventually forced out.

They're mad because the policy is vague. It all stems from the professor at KU tweeting that he wished violence on children of NRA members following the death of 13 people in DC at the Navy Yard. He was put on leave and eventually forced out.

 

Sounds like the professor deserved to be forced out. "Come attend the proud state university of Kansas where teachers publicly hope to see kids violently hurt. "

They're mad because the policy is vague. It all stems from the professor at KU tweeting that he wished violence on children of NRA members following the death of 13 people in DC at the Navy Yard. He was put on leave and eventually forced out.

 

Donald Sterling feels sympathy

 

They're mad because the policy is vague. It all stems from the professor at KU tweeting that he wished violence on children of NRA members following the death of 13 people in DC at the Navy Yard. He was put on leave and eventually forced out.

 

Yea, that's pretty sick.

IIRC he said something along the lines of "blood is on your hands, I hope its your children next time." Not professional or level-headed, but not exactly just wishing random violence or retaliation against their children.

IIRC he said something along the lines of "blood is on your hands, I hope its your children next time." Not professional or level-headed, but not exactly just wishing random violence or retaliation against their children.

 

That’s pretty much what Greg said.

 

I’m reading that as the dude hopes that the next time there is a shooting, that the children of NRA members are the ones that die. Sick.

 

edit:

The tweet was "The blood is on the hands of the #NRA. Next time, let it be YOUR sons and daughters. Shame on you. May God damn you."

Edited May 30, 201411 yr by Iwritecode

It's twitter so there's not exactly a lot of nuance, but I imagine that argument is more that the NRA works to prevent any and all forms of gun regulation which all but guarantees that there will be another mass shooting with dead children. It is then only fair that the NRA lobbyists who work to prevent gun control suffer the consequences of their work instead of others.

 

Not exactly a great argument, but different from arguing for retaliation.

It's twitter so there's not exactly a lot of nuance, but I imagine that argument is more that the NRA works to prevent any and all forms of gun regulation which all but guarantees that there will be another mass shooting with dead children. It is then only fair that the NRA lobbyists who work to prevent gun control suffer the consequences of their work instead of others.

 

Not exactly a great argument, but different from arguing for retaliation.

Having dealt with some of the people who try to give nuance to extremely violent sounding things on Twitter, I'm just gonna say, no. If you're going to tweet something like that you deserve to deal with the results.

I don't disagree that it was a dumb thing to tweet and that it's pretty dumb even with "nuance," just not sure if the consequences should necessarily be losing your job or having the state legislature change the law so that you can lose your job.

I don't disagree that it was a dumb thing to tweet and that it's pretty dumb even with "nuance," just not sure if the consequences should necessarily be losing your job or having the state legislature change the law so that you can lose your job.

 

Professors that are very upset and as a result are looking to leave KU as soon as they can, are pointing to the fact no other state has this policy. The guy was blasting the NRA and brought their kids into it. Should he be censored? Free speech?

BTW I would be fired in a fast second if I tweeted something radical at my job.

I'm going back and forth on the speech issue. No, it's not a violation of his 1st amendment rights probably, but it's still a stifling of his speech. The speech wasn't related to his job in any way, but he was (or became) a public face for the university. I'd certainly be fired for tweeting something like that from a work account, but would I or should I be fired for tweeting it from a personal account completely disconnected from my job, given that I'm not in any way a public face for the company?

Professors that are very upset and as a result are looking to leave KU as soon as they can, are pointing to the fact no other state has this policy. The guy was blasting the NRA and brought their kids into it. Should he be censored? Free speech?

BTW I would be fired in a fast second if I tweeted something radical at my job.

I get the academic freedom part, genuinely do, but I would be inclined to draw an academic freedom line at suggestions of violence.

 

However, if there's a policy in Kansas now that restricts Academic Freedom significantly beyond that, then it would very much make sense for everyone else to leave their universities.

I'm going back and forth on the speech issue. No, it's not a violation of his 1st amendment rights probably, but it's still a stifling of his speech. The speech wasn't related to his job in any way, but he was (or became) a public face for the university. I'd certainly be fired for tweeting something like that from a work account, but would I or should I be fired for tweeting it from a personal account completely disconnected from my job, given that I'm not in any way a public face for the company?

 

If it brought bad attention to your institution that you worked for, you are damned right you would be fired. Many financial sector companies won't even let you list the company on your personal twitter/facebook account because of their fear of being associated with something stupid their employees might say.

I understand, my hypothetical was more if say my boss became aware of me making an offensive tweet but otherwise it's completely disconnected from my work. He could still fire me for that reason (or no reason), but I don't think someone should necessarily be fired in a case like that.

I believe the freedom of speech amendment is the least understood part of the Constitution.

I believe the freedom of speech amendment is the least understood part of the Constitution.

 

But U of Kansas is going to lose tons of faculty over this policy and no other states are enacting it. Don't you think Kansas once again is acting like a bunch of clowns?

But U of Kansas is going to lose tons of faculty over this policy and no other states are enacting it. Don't you think Kansas once again is acting like a bunch of clowns?

The difference between your statement and Tex's statement is that one is referring to "Freedom of Speech", the other is referring to "Academic Freedom", a specific set of rules that tenured professors are given to allow/encourage them to make controversial statements because science often benefits from controversial, otherwise indefensible statements.

But U of Kansas is going to lose tons of faculty over this policy and no other states are enacting it. Don't you think Kansas once again is acting like a bunch of clowns?

 

First off, no they won't. It is about the worst time in academic history for a professor to be looking for employment. It's the classic case of the employer holding all the power. So don't worry too much. Sadly, the few they will lose will probably be their best as far as research is concerned. There is a surplus of PhDs currently looking for faculty positions. The past generation or two has been pushed to earn college degrees. The new HS diploma is the BA, the new BS is a MS, and the new MS is a PhD. That's not necessarily a bad thing for the country, but it is terrible on a personal level as we adjust to this new economy of formal education. We can't built things cheaper than elsewhere but we can educate. Now to turn that advantage into a thriving economy.