| dc.description.abstract | Concepts are shared, considered, traded, and transmitted in institutions of higher learning. Protecting the freedom to engage in such discussions at colleges and universities ensures continued academic freedom and learning uninhibited by a state or cultural ideology.
Public higher education institutions are required to protect freedoms of speech and expression granted by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and are frequent locations for avant-garde ideas and speakers expressing views unpopular with segments of the population. When the speech spurs reactions threatening campus disruption and safety, it is controversial. Such controversies can be costly to an institution’s finances, reputation, and relations with constituents. This study seeks to understand how higher education institutions prepare for, manage, and protect speech and the campus when visited by a high-profile, controversial speaker.
Two controversial speakers generating such responses at U.S. colleges and universities during 2016-2018 were Milo Yiannopoulos and Richard Spencer, each embarking on self-titled campus tours including “danger” or “dangerous” in the title. Using a qualitative, multi-case study design, the research explores and compares how the University of California at Berkeley and Texas A&M University prepared for, managed, and protected speech and the campus during two announced and actual visits of the “Danger Tour” speakers at each campus in 2017. Data were collected through 22 participant interviews, review of documents released by the institutions in response to state public information or request laws, and news reports.
Findings of the unique Danger Tour experiences of the universities studied are chronologically detailed and thematically viewed through the prism of First Amendment legal principles and Tierney’s Framework of Organizational Culture. The data indicate that higher education institutions prioritize legal compliance and missional obligations to protect even disruptive expression on their campuses, even though fulfilling these commitments is a resource-intensive endeavor. Institutional cultural and campus safety concerns influence university responses to controversial speech and aid in sense-making of the very different outcomes of the announced controversial expression of Yiannopoulos and Spencer at the University of California at Berkeley and Spencer Texas A&M University. The study suggests higher education institutions implement early plans aligning with the campus culture and educational mission to prepare for controversies and socialize the importance of protecting academic and First Amendment freedoms. | |
