Study suggests most censorship at college campuses is directed towards leftists. - Polidicks

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/3/17644180/political-correctness-free-speech-liberal-data-georgetown It's Vox but the study was done by the nonpartisan Free Speech Project at Georgetown University.

Wow it's like gaslighting and projection is the go-to toolkit for the right wing across the board these days.

Can we cancel the right wing nutjobs, yet?

The entire article is basically "There wouldn't be so many violations against conservatives if they didn't invite certain people, so we're going to ignore that huge portion of the statistics."

This is a surprise to me considering I see examples of right censorship in the news, but so far have only heard of examples of left censorship from anecdotes.

The right love to brag about being 'for free speech' but they aren't any better, and if you look at the alt-right, they straight up use it for their own gain while actively being entirely against it, and they're open about that. Every time I hear someone talk about "Yeah, but i do like the right for their defense of free speech" its embarrassing. Yall fuckers are exactly the same and can't even see it.

Because it's over-represented in the media. NYT coverage of free speech focused 7 to 1 on right-wing speech.

https://medium.com/informed-and-engaged/campus-speech-protests-dont-only-target-conservatives-though-they-frequently-target-the-same-few-bda3105ad347 Just read it dude it's not saying what you think it is.

Right-wing provocateurs like Milo and Ben Shapiro intentionally say outrageous and hateful things and book speaking jobs at campuses with active and vocal student populations, knowing full well they're going to be met with resistance, in order to capitalize on that resistance by manufacturing outrage and stoking prejudice against leftist causes. Compare that with their left-wing counterparts such as Bernie Sanders, who held a forum at Liberty University (the most reactionary Christian conservative "college" in the entire nation) to talk about important issues and bridge the culture divide between the working-class left and right, rather than performing an act of self-aggrandizing political theater. Punks such as Milo and Ben Shapiro are nothing but tools in a reactionary right-wing agenda whose foundation is white supremacy and corporate oligarchy. They have no sincerely held beliefs and they're not out to spread an honest conservative cause, they are merely professional victims whose personal interest align with those of their corporate masters. Their agenda shouldn't be equated with left or right student activism, because most of that activism and debate takes place in the classroom rather than in the media spotlight.

I did read it. To be clear, I don't think that anyone should be fired OR their speech suppressed, period. I've held this view very steadily for god knows how long. But both articles downplay certain suppression, and focus on another. That is bias. It's still speech being stifled, no matter how you slice it.

It actually doesn't downplay it at all. Did you read it? Can you point out where it downplays it? It acknowledges it, explains it, and compares it to the opposite. You're saying they're downplaying it, yet they literally do not do that in the medium article linked which sources to the article this is all coming from. "However, most of the incidents where presumptively conservative speech has been interrupted or squelched in the last two or three years seem to involve the same few speakers: Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, Charles Murray, and Ann Coulter — all different from each other, and not necessarily allies, but the people most frequently publicized for being at the heart of campus controversies. In some instances, they seem to invite, and delight in, disruption." If this is "Downplaying" then literally nothing could, or would be adequate for you.

The right wing has an incredibly effective propaganda machine set up right now, working through the internet and certain newsgroups, to signal-boost any and all slights against them. They're playing a game of optics and will search out and present any instance of the left acting in 'bad faith' against them. It's their primary recruiting tool, their strategy being to flood the internet and the news channels with instances of 'left wing aggression' in an effort to convince vulnerable individuals that they are, in fact, under attack by an authoritarian zeitgeist. This is why it's incredibly, incredibly important to avoid giving them ammunition when possible, and to make it clear that they are not some sort of oppressed minority.

I think the right is far better at leveraging media to contribute to their goals. Karl Rove was extremely skilled at this. Just look at this clip showing his genius in deflecting genuine concern with a joke: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoPu1UIBkBc Fox News are hopelessly biased and are the most watched 'news' show on TV in America. In Britain, they were taken off air due to breaking journalistic standards, but America doesn't have an equivalent to Ofcom (who regulate to ensure that both sides of a debate are represented by honest actors.) Whilst I think Vox can be quite biased indeed on political issues, they don't claim otherwise, and they use reputable sources to back up their claims, even if some people may disagree with them.

in addition to this they're rated highly factual by MBFC

Reposting from other thread: the only monkey wrench in this tho is that he isn't accounting for ratios of faculty members being left or right https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/6/liberal-professors-outnumber-conservatives-12-1/ So raw numbers might not be a full picture That and the creator of the study wrote this Some disclaimers are warranted here: The selection of incidents documented on the Free Speech Tracker is by no means comprehensive and never will be. The results thus far are anecdotal, and despite efforts to avoid it, there could be a selection bias in the incidents chosen. And the classification of people whose expression is compromised as being on the “right” or the “left” may well be subjective and arbitrary. Campus speech protests don’t only target conservatives, and when.. It probably is important to keep in mind that left-wing faculty outnumber right-wing by a far margin and that the creator of this study says alot of the data is built on anecdote.

Yeah, if the number of left-wing faculty being reprimanded was double that of their right-wing counterparts, but there were four times as many left-wing faculty than right-wing, then that would suggest that a right-wing faculty member is twice as likely to be reprimanded. The raw number of incidents on either side isn't especially useful without knowing the demographic breakdown of campuses, and the study itself acknowledges this and other issues. I think the more interesting and useful takeaways here are just how rare free speech events are in comparison to the number of colleges in America, and how many of the incidents of conservatives being disinvited have to do with known shit-stirrers rather than good-faith attempts at dialogue, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that some would misrepresent the study to turn it into a pissing match instead.