To the Editors of The Quindecim:
I write with regard to the unbalanced and misleading news and editorial coverage in the November 16 issue of The Quindecim of the recent controversy surrounding a program at Goucher on the issue of Palestinian human rights.
First, an essential fact: no one blocked or banned any speaker on this topic or any other from coming to the Goucher campus. The group of five students from a Peace Studies class who proposed to conduct a “dialogue” on this issue by presenting three speakers, all essentially on the same side, were always welcome to do so in their classroom. The problem arose when the group sought to make its final project for the class a public program at Goucher; that is when I and several others, perhaps relying on an old-fashioned notion of what constitutes a “dialogue,” asked that at least one voice representing a different perspective be added to the program.
I am proud of the genuine dialogue and lively conversation that has taken place at Goucher on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and a great range of other issues during my almost eight-and-a-half years as president. Our students and the broader community have benefited from exposure to many different points of view, some of them quite controversial, and my office has worked closely with the Student Government Association (SGA) and various clubs to help maximize attendance at, and assure the educational value of, our many public programs. The college, of course, has no official position to promote, but it is committed to helping students find their own voices and develop their own sophisticated views on the issues of the day.
Goucher does exist and live in the real world, however, and no campus program or series of programs takes place in a vacuum. We want the college to be seen and appreciated – by the families who send their children here (and those who are considering doing so), by our alumnae/i, and by the many other communities of which we are a part – for what it is: an intellectual and creative caldron, a place where all perspectives are welcome and we treat each other with respect and dignity. Yes, we seek to “transcend boundaries,” and we strive to be better than the world around us.
Some of us have the responsibility to make judgment calls from time to time, and when we see the conversation on particular issues being skewed in one exclusive direction, to attempt a corrective – never to exclude points of view, but perhaps to diversify and scramble them a bit. Some of our discussions in recent years on Middle East topics, among others, have become rather inflammatory, and I have even had occasion to have people removed from the audience in order to permit others to be heard. Last spring there was an especially uncomfortable moment, when some students felt that they, their families, and their heritage were being cruelly slandered during a confrontation on campus surrounding Palestinian-Israeli matters. I thought that at the time, under the leadership of our chaplain, we had undertaken a new and profound commitment to be sure that our efforts going forward were characterized by balance and sensitivity toward all members of our campus community.
It was in that spirit, and with that resolve – not, as suggested by the Quindecim’s editorial, on the basis of any outside pressure whatsoever – that we asked the group of Peace Studies students to broaden their recent “dialogue.” They refused to do so, unfortunately, but they did hold their program in their class (actually, in a larger classroom than usual, as I understand it, and with some others in attendance who were not members of the class). The academic freedom that is an essential characteristic of all fields of study at Goucher was, of course, preserved.
Some have alleged that my actions, and those of other college officials, in this matter were a violation of a clause in the Student Bill of Rights that Goucher put into place, working with the SGA, two years ago. But nothing is absolute (if it were, we would not need a federal court system to interpret the First Amendment and other aspects of the U.S. Constitution), and in no way does Goucher’s Student Bill of Rights authorize individual members of the community, or small groups of them, to cast the college in an embarrassing light that affects its reputation. Goucher’s general counsel, other colleagues, and I are committed to taking part in conversations with the SGA to help clarify matters as much as possible; but some constructive ambiguities may have to remain to be tested by routine experience.
As president of the college, I am delighted that The Quindecim has come back to life this semester and is making its own independent contribution to the lively dialogue on campus. As a long-time journalist, however, I am distressed to see that the person in charge of the news content of the paper is one and the same as the person editing opinion columns (and, presumably, selecting grim photographs to reflect the paper’s official line on a story like this one). I hope and trust that an expansion of the staff will soon permit a sharpening of reporting and a more conventional separation of these key functions.
Sandy Ungar Rebuttal: Quindecim Coverage Unbalanced
Published: Thursday, December 10, 2009
Updated: Monday, August 9, 2010 20:08
Be the first to comment on this article!