A new survey shows that Princeton has far to go on free speech
by Edward Yingling
Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS) has released an important new survey of Princeton students that clearly demonstrates Princeton has much work to do to create a campus on which students understand and value free speech. The survey also identifies steps that Princeton can take to improve the atmosphere for free speech on campus. See here for the survey.
This is the first comprehensive student free speech survey by a college alumni group. It builds on the annual survey of students at over 200 colleges and universities commissioned by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and adds important new information about Princeton. It was undertaken by College Pulse, which does the annual survey for FIRE and is a nationally recognized organization specializing in polling students.
The orientation for the incoming Princeton students last September included a strong component on the importance of free speech, supplemented by a speech by Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber. Several times in the months since President Eisgruber has publicly promoted free speech. This is commendable, yet it is clear from the survey that there is a huge gap between the rhetoric and the reality; most Princeton students neither support nor understand basic free speech principles.
For example, the survey revealed:
Only 18% of students say they are very familiar with Princeton's free speech rule.
48% of students say that any speech that uses discriminatory language, or language that a class of persons finds offensive or hurtful, should not be allowed, a standard that clearly violates Princeton’s free speech rule. Only 30% say they support the standard of free speech in the First Amendment.
40% of students say an athletic team should be able to deny a spot to, or suspend, a student who expresses views others find offensive, although such action would also clearly violate the university’s rules.
Most disturbingly, only 24% say it is never appropriate to shout down a speaker; only 57% say it is never appropriate to block other students from attending a speech; and 16% say it might at least on rare occasions be appropriate to use violence to block a speaker.
Furthermore, the survey clearly demonstrates that students are often afraid to say what they believe on controversial topics. For example:
70% of students say they would be very or somewhat uncomfortable publicly disagreeing with a professor in class on a controversial topic.
56% of students say they would be very or somewhat uncomfortable expressing their views in class on a controversial topic.
The atmosphere on free speech is particularly negative for conservative students. For example, 41% of students somewhat or strongly agree that Princeton administrators and faculty engage in efforts to indoctrinate students with their personal political beliefs, but students who identify as either Republicans or as independent and lean Republican are more than twice as likely to say they agree (78% vs. 29%). This finding in the PFS survey is supported by a recent survey of graduating seniors at Princeton. A recent opinion piece in the Daily Princetonian noted that in the survey, 64.3% of very conservative and 55.2% of somewhat conservative students expressed significant discomfort openly sharing their political views on campus while only 3.2 % of “leftist” and 5.2% of very liberal students did so.
If Princeton wants to continue to claim, despite significant evidence to the contrary, that free speech thrives on campus, much more must be done. The orientation program was a start and must continue every year, but that – along with a few statements from Princeton’s president – is nowhere near enough. PFS intends to do this survey annually, thus providing a measure of whether progress is being made to improve free speech at Princeton.
PFS will continue to do its part to improve the climate for free speech on campus by supporting faculty and students who exercise free speech, providing educational materials to students, and sponsoring programs and debates that model open discourse.
The survey provides input from students on what steps the university should undertake. For example, 60% of students say they would like to see the university host debates on controversial topics, something the University has not done. Other suggestions receiving support from students include offering courses on free speech and hiring an administrative officer to act as an ombudsperson to protect free speech and address alleged breaches of the free speech rule on campus. Given that issues of free speech at Princeton now are apparently under the purview of DEI administrators, this new ombudsperson role is vital.
The survey also asked questions directly related to current issues at Princeton. Many universities, including Princeton, are using online reporting systems to allow bias incident complaints to be filed, often anonymously, against students and sometimes faculty. The public and, indeed, students knew little about these systems until very recently, and these systems have now become very controversial. Sixty-eight percent of Princeton students strongly or somewhat disagree with the use of such systems.
Another issue currently under consideration: Under what circumstances should Princeton or its departments take official positions on important but controversial political, moral, or social issues? The survey clearly shows that taking such positions would have a chilling effect on free speech. On the question, “If Princeton or the department in which you are majoring took a position on a controversial topic that you disagreed with, how comfortable would you feel expressing your disagreement with that position in a class discussion or written assignment?” 54% of students said they would feel very or somewhat uncomfortable. Recently, Vanderbilt and the University of North Carolina have adopted strong statements on institutional neutrality. This finding in our survey supports that position.
Much work needs to be done at Princeton and other schools. We hope our survey will serve as a model for alumni free speech and other groups that want to measure the true atmosphere for free speech on their campus. PFS stands ready to work with Princeton’s leadership, faculty, and student groups to create a university where free speech is truly valued, defended, and thriving.
Edward Yingling is co-founder of Princetonians for Free Speech and chairman emeritus of the Alumni Free Speech Alliance.