Leaders at Stanford, Williams and elsewhere limit their statements, but neutrality proves a challenge

Douglas Belkin and Melissa Korn:

Backlash against their declarations has forced many to stumble—issuing updates to their statements, and then clarifications to their updates—in a near impossible effort to appease irate activists on both sides of a seemingly intractable issue.

The reversal comes in contrast to recent years when these academic leaders used their public profiles to condemn, support and otherwise opine on hot-button topics. They have released statements about events including the murder of George Floyd, gun violence in Texas and attacks on mosques in New Zealand.

Sending the wrong message runs the risk of limiting donor contributions and institutional prestige while elevating concerns that institutions are taking sides and chilling free speech at what are supposed to be arenas of intellectual debate.

Yet saying nothing is proving problematic as well, leaving school leaders in a difficult position. After years of weighing in on a range of issues, they are often expected to contribute to the public dialogue. The absence of a message can be perceived as a statement in its own right.