In order to avoid imposing on students’ right to free speech, Syracuse University should make revising the harassment section in its Student Code of Conduct a priority.

Last week, the Student Association passed a resolution pertaining to SU’s definition of harassment on computers and social media, and how it relates to free speech. The resolution suggests that the current language used in the university policy is vague and objective.

The resolution aims to eliminate vague wording from the Code of Conduct — which describes harassment as “offensive” and “annoying” messages — and replace wording to be more specific definitions, such as “threats of violence, obscenity, child pornography and harassing communications as defined by law.”

The university should change its policy to what this resolution suggested.

The current policy is unfair to students as it is vague and objective. Without harassment clearly defined, students could be hesitant or uncomfortable voicing their opinions online for fear of discipline from the university. The unclear policy could potentially limit free speech by making students afraid to say what they actually believe, especially if they have controversial opinions.

In 2011, SU was ranked the worst school for free speech in the nation by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. The recent Hanna Strong incident also raised the issue of what exactly constitutes free speech on campus, and what is punishable according to university policy.

Because SU is a private university, it can create the standards students are held to in terms of what they say and do. But it should only limit, as suggested by the resolution, what is actually illegal or threatening to other students.

The policy the resolution suggests could clear up the confusion that surrounds the current rules regarding free speech online.

Throughout this semester, the university has promoted open dialogue on campus regarding student issues such as inclusion and diversity. This should not be any different online. In order to be a more progressive university that truly allows for an open dialogue, SU must revise its policy.

The university should take the necessary steps to implement Student Association’s suggested change to the Student Code of Conduct. The free speech problem at SU has been known since 2011, and the new administration should make it a priority to address it.

Published on October 13, 2014 at 12:01 am

Contact: [email protected]