St. Petersburg Times Editorial Saturday, February 17, 1996
A university's most important mission is to serve as a haven for free expression,
and university presidents have no greater responsibility than to assure
that their campuses remain true to that mission. Florida State University
President Talbot "Sandy" D'Alemberte should under-stand that responsibility
better than most. D'Alemberte, a former president of the American Bar Association,
is a longtime First Amendment advocate, representing many publications,
including this one, in legal battles against government authorities that
engage in improper censorship or intimidation.
That's why it's especially disappointing to learn that D'Alemberte and other
FSU officials have been caught engaging in a strange pattern of behavior
that, intentionally or not, has cast a chill over free expression on their
campus.
Here's what happened: An FSU honors student named Robert Potter wrote a
letter to the Tallahassee Democrat to fulfill an assignment in his "Writing
for Media" class. The letter, published in the Democrat on Jan. 28,
dealt with some of the problems caused by campus overcrowding: increased
class sizes, reduced course availability, inadequate parking. It was an
unremarkable letter that expressed opinions shared by thousands of other
FSU students and staff members.
D'Alemberte and other FSU administrators should have reacted to the letter
with a shrug. Instead, they responded with a flurry of e-mail messages conversations
and actions that were wildly out of proportion to the innocuous event that
precipitated them. Top officials of the school launched an effort to identify
Potter, investigate his background and summon him to their offices for a
bit of high-level re-education.
Elisabeth Muhlenfeld, dean of under-graduate students, was the first to
meet with Potter. "She knew I was an honors student," Potter told
the Florida Flambeau. "And she said it was sad so promising
a student would write a letter like this."
Meanwhile, Chrys Egan, the instructor of the "Writing in Media"
class, received her own summons. Egan, who also is a Ph.D. candidate in
communication at FSU, got some cautionary advice from Jay Rayburn, the director
of graduate studies in her department. She said Rayburn told her to "make
sure (her students) had their facts straight before they accused the university
of any wrongdoing."
D'Alemberte and other FSU officials also indulged in some unwarranted criticism
of the Democrat for publishing Potter's letter, but the newspaper's editors
are big enough and independent enough to stand up for themselves. Students
and instructors aren't so fortunate.
In a disingenuous "open letter" to FSU students, D'Alemberte claimed
that the only purpose for all this activity was to determine "whether
I could help" Potter. He says he was "astonished" that anyone
saw his administration's conduct as threatening or intimidating.
D'Alemberte may be astonished, but the intimidating atmosphere he and his
underlings have created is undeniable.
"If I had known all the trouble (the letter) would bring, I would not
have written it," Potter said.
Egan has even more reason to feel threatened. "I am so intimidated
by all this," she said. "I've got eight years in my higher education.
I don't want to do anything to upset the administration so I don't blow
the awarding of my Ph.D. next year."
A student wrote a perfectly reasonable - and unusually coherent - letter
to fulfill a perfectly reasonable assignment from his instructor. Yet both
of them - and by extension, all other members of the FSU community - have
been given ample reason to worry that even the mildest criticism of university
administrators will bring them under uncomfortable scrutiny.
Back when he was paid to defend the First Amendment, D'Alemberte would have
no trouble identifying such intimidation for what it is. His appreciation
for the full expression of intellectual freedom should be every bit as keen
in his role as a university president. He owes the FSU community another
open letter that is more faithful to his record as a champion of free speech.
Response of FSU President · Talbot "Sandy" D'Alemberte
There is little to argue with in the St. Petersburg Times editorial.
Certainly I agree that the university must be a haven for free expression.
I might even agree that my best reaction to the Potter letter would have
been a shrug. I have apologized for my thin skin, and promised to get tougher.
I might even agree that our behavior was seen as "strange," as
the St. Petersburg Times puts it, and it is clear to me that it did cast
a chill on the FSU campus, causing people to worry about the commitment
to free expression.
The reaction to our e-mail messages was a flurry of signed, bold and even
taunting letters to several editors challenging me. I assure you that the
writers of those letters - most of them students, faculty or staff - have
gone on their unfettered way, unin-timidated by the ad-ministration of FSU.
They were not afraid to attack us in public, and they were right to be unafraid.
I have since talked to Robert Potter's instructor, Chrys Egan, and I think
I can say that she is satisfied that there is no threat to her career. I
have written to Mr. Potter and invited him to visit if he wants to talk.
I have apologized for any feeling of harassment he may have felt.
I repeat what I said a few weeks ago: I have never faulted the student who
wrote the letter or the instructor who assigned it. Any contribution to
free debate is worthwhile even if, as in this case, the contributor disagrees
with the university position on an issue.
The lesson I have learned is that I am not free to react emotionally to
criticism, fair or unfair. It is a good lesson for me to learn. I can disagree,
and spell out my arguments, but I must be careful not to make students and
faculty think their discussion is offensive to the president of the university.
It is not.
We are now much more aware of the sensitivity of students and faculty to
the reactions of administrators. Because we understand that now, I think
I can say that never again, as long as I am president, will students or
faculty at Florida State University feel intimidated or in any way pressured
to suppress the expression of their opinions. If they are, I ask them to
appeal personally to me, by e-mail (at dalember@ westcott.wes.fsu.edu) or
at one of the monthly open forums that I conduct for students.
My only excuse for my initial overreaction to the Potter letter was that
he was complaining about problems that we have worked doggedly - and I must
say, with great success - to solve. Class sizes have not grown larger since
I became president. In fact, 70 percent of classes at FSU have 30 or fewer
students, and we have added more than 500 new classes or sections since
the 1992-93 school year. (I wished the Democrat had checked the accuracy
of the letter, as the editors sometimes have done with us, but I never imagined
that the newspaper needed my permission to print anything.)
But critics would be right to remind me that we cannot expect students to
be grateful - or even notice - if we have solved some of their problems
and are working on others. If I had not understood the nature of youth and
its natural impatience, I should not have applied for the presidency of
this university.
So I appeal to the alumni, faculty, friends and most of all the students,
to continue to keep us vigilant about open and free expression.
Critics should try to speak the truth, try to get the facts straight and
be fair.
But whether or not these ideals are met, they should feel safe to say what
they think.
And this is particularly important at a university.