Free speech needs defenders, not gatekeepers
Free speech faces new challenges in all corners of America, and MIT must stand firm in its defense.
Campus tensions have been rising for the past few years, and we have seen the campus administration address this issue to mixed results. President Kornbluth has previously announced that the MIT Police will take an increased role in monitoring offensive speech on campus. The Office of the Vice President for Finance at MIT removed the Brown Book, the authoritative document on the sources of MIT research funding, from public view earlier this year. MIT's “time, place, and manner” policies, which restrain some forms of public expression “as not to disrupt essential activities,” appeared to be an attempt to allow responsible free expression while maintaining order. However, the Institute has been rather heavy-handed with this approach. For example, the postering policy bans all non-Massachusetts or non-MIT flag displays on campus, be it a Palestinian or Pride flag. Recently, the Broad was one of several institutions that fired individuals for making statements about Charlie Kirk after his assassination.
While these actions may be well-intentioned attempts to maintain order, they risk curbing legitimate expression and eroding the foundations of open dialogue.We hope MIT continues to encourage students to engage in face-to-face dialogue, such as Dialogue@MIT and realtalk@MIT.
We condemn the hate speech and symbols that have appeared on campus. Anonymous or bad-faith attacks have replaced honest discussion to become the language of much of our campus and institutions around the country. The consequences of such behavior are especially clear on social media, which has become the platform housing the discussion of controversial topics. Behind screens, students across the political spectrum lash out at one another, impress discriminatory titles and affiliations onto others, and contribute to an ever-more polarized environment on our campuses.
MIT is home to a wealth of ideological diversity, and this is a strength among many that makes the Institute a hub for innovation. Thus, we have a duty to protect the right to freedom of expression on campus. Indeed, the MIT administration faces pressures from all sides and will take actions meant to preserve funding and protect the institution’s status quo. MIT has recently been challenged to acquiesce to extreme federal oversight by the Trump administration in a proposed compact. This compact is antithetical to MIT values, and we are proud that President Kornbluth has rejected these measures.
As MIT's oldest and largest student-run newspaper, The Tech remains committed to protecting speech on campus. Student journalists have a duty to cover global and local issues, including conflicts with profound humanitarian consequences, with accuracy, context, and without fear. As campus communities navigate deep disagreements over events in Gaza, our role is to inform, to listen to all voices, and to create space for understanding. The targeting of student protestors, leaders, and journalists – Rumeysa Ozturk, Mahmoud Khalil, and many others – underscore the importance of freedom of press and remind us that open discourse is essential to reconciliation.
Journalism is the first draft of history. At the start of our term as an executive board, we prioritized restoring neutrality and due process in our opinion section. We reinstated and broadened our Editorial Board to ensure multiple perspectives in every opinion decision. Each submission to our Opinion Section is reviewed by each member of the Editorial Board – as well as Editors-at-Large on an as needed basis – debated, and returned to authors with questions as necessary. Furthermore, we have modified our anonymity policy to better protect international students and those who may draw the ire of the federal government.
A plurality of voices is what we strive to represent. When only a few people dominate, everyone may suffer.
We remain committed to publishing and giving due diligence to diverse perspectives of our students, faculty, and alumni. True dialogue begins when we can respect speech we dislike — because only then can understanding grow.