# Why all the fuss over Ward Churchill? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 20, 2005, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980 "2005-02-20T02:45:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/121 "2005-03-11T03:30:40Z")
Update: University of Colorado Elizabeth Hoffman has resigned – mainly over a football recruiting scandal that took place on her watch; but the Churchill flap didn’t help matters any, and the school is reviewing his speeches and writings “to to determine if the professor overstepped his boundaries of academic freedom and whether that should be grounds for dismissal.” [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/03/07/national/a083443S78.DTL&type=printable](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/03/07/national/a083443S78.DTL&type=printable) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/122 "2005-03-11T03:32:02Z")
Sorry, that’s “University of Colorado **President** Elizabeth Hoffman has resigned.” ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/123 "2005-03-11T06:31:54Z")
Exciting times at Colorado. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/124 "2005-03-11T16:32:26Z")
I’ve just been lurking in this thread so far but I wanted to give my two cents and ask a question or two. This thread started out as ‘Why all the fuss over Ward Churchill?’…I think thats kind of shifted as its pretty obvious why he created such a stir with what he wrote. My own opinion is he WANTED to create a fuss over what he wrote…and its having the intended effect. Perhaps even more than the intended effect (though I doubt it). The thread seems to have shifted to whether or not Churchill should be fired for what he wrote in spite of the fact he has tenure. In my own mind I’d say that this has more to do with the level of embarrasment the school took from the writing than the actual subject…i.e. its up to the school to decide. On purely free speech grounds he is more than free to write any damn fool thing he likes IMO…as long as he’s willing to pay the consequences listed earlier (i.e. possible consequences for his continued employment, “scorn, ridicule and death threats” etc). You can write anything you like, say anything you like…problem is, no one is forced to like what you say or to say only nice things back, or to keep you employed, even with tenure. Death threats of course are another kettle of fish…its illegal (afaik). My question to BG is: Are there any reasons in your own mind someone should be fired because of what they write, even when they have tenure? If they write about white supremacy or other racially motivated subjects…or any other distasteful subjects? If you feel that someone writing on such subjects should not be fired if they have tenure then thats fine…I will assume a freedom of speech motive. If not though…why not? -XT ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/125 "2005-03-11T18:40:28Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > My question to BG is: Are there any reasons in your own mind someone should be fired because of what they write, even when they have tenure? If they write about white supremacy or other racially motivated subjects…or any other distasteful subjects? No, because that would chill free discussion of distasteful subjects – and every subject or POV is bound to be “distasteful” to someone. (Hell, I think the rules of **this forum** are too strict. **Aldebaran** should **not** have been banned just for expressing a desire to go to Iraq and fight for the insurgency.) I think the rules of tenure should be what they are now: You can get fired for what you write only if it involves plaigiarism or other offenses of plain intellectual dishonesty. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/126 "2005-03-11T18:51:06Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > No, because that would chill free discussion of distasteful subjects – and every subject or POV is bound to be “distasteful” to someone. (Hell, I think the rules of this forum are too strict. Aldebaran should not have been banned just for expressing a desire to go to Iraq and fight for the insurgency.) I think the rules of tenure should be what they are now: You can get fired for what you write only if it involves plaigiarism or other offenses of plain intellectual dishonesty. Fair enough…as long as its applied equally and not based on partisan positions. I even tend to agree with you, though of course its an employeers right to make the final judgement as far as employment goes…even if that employeer is a college. I think there are other grounds for dismissal than simply ‘plaigiarism or other offenses of plain intellectual dishonesty’, and its within the employeers rights to make that determination…though were it me THIS (i.e. what Churchill has written) wouldn’t be grounds for dismissal. Easy for me to say though as I’m in no position to make the tough call…and I’m also not privy to what this whole affair may or may not do to enrollment or what other factors may or may not be effected negatively at the college. I was also saddened when Aldebaran was banned, though I could understand the position of the mods. In his case though he had walked the edge numerous times, so for myself I was waiting for when he’d be banned…I knew it was only a matter of time. -XT ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/127 "2005-03-11T22:05:58Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > . . . though of course its an employeers right to make the final judgement as far as employment goes…even if that employeer is a college. Not exactly . . . remember that while different institutions might have rules that differ in their details, what we’re dealing with here is in the nature of an industry-wide standard (if academia can be characterized as an “industry.”) From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure:) > [@](#): > > Tenure commonly refers to academic tenure systems, in which professors (at the university level)—and in some jurisdictions schoolteachers (at primary or secondary school levels)—are granted the right not to be fired without cause after an initial probationary period. Tenure systems are usually justified by the claim that they provide academic freedom, by preventing instructors from being fired for openly disagreeing with authorities or popular opinion. Such systems may also have an economic rationale, similar to the rationale for senior partner positions in many law and accounting firms, in that employees who cannot be replaced may be more likely to give accurate assessments of more junior colleagues who might otherwise threaten their positions. Another reason tenure exists is that, in the realm of academic and intellectual persuits, individuals may produce higher quality output when they have job security than when they don’t. When they have the job security and autonomy of a tenured position, academics are able to pursue their own topics of interest, which they are usually more passionate about, and produce better results. Without job security, they will generally attempt to measure what pursuits they are “supposed to” follow, and in imitation of those guidelines, produce a lower quality of output. > > Academic tenure is politically unpopular in many places, where opponents charge that it removes incentives for its holders to be productive and unfairly relieves professors of the economic uncertainty felt by other workers. For these reasons, tenure was officially abolished in public universities in the United Kingdom by the Thatcher government in the 1980s (this is actually not true, there is a tenure system in England as in America. However, there are only a certain number of professors, as the rank of professor is only conferred to those who have a “chaired” position. But nontheless, both professors and readers (as well as lecturers) can be tenured in the UK.), and has repeatedly come under attack at state universities in the United States. Many universities have also moved to supplement tenured professors with non-tenured adjunct professors, who teach classes on a contract basis for relatively low wages and few benefits. > > \ > > Tenure can only be revoked for cause, normally only following severe misconduct by the professor. In the US, according to the Wall Street Journal (January 10, 2005), it is estimated that only 50 to 75 tenured professors (out of about 280,000) lose their tenure each year. Revocation is usually a lengthy and tedious procedure. In Colorado, where the question of what constitutes grounds for dismissal of a tenured professor arose as the result of the controversial comments of Ward Churchill regarding the victims of the 9/11 attack, grounds for dismissal are “professional incompetence, neglect of duty, insubordination, conviction of a felony or any offense involving moral turpitude … or sexual harassment or other conduct which falls below minimum standards of professional integrity.” And, from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic\_freedom#The\_Professor:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_freedom#The_Professor:) > [@](#): > > The concept of academic freedom as a right of faculty members (Lehrfreiheit in German) is an established part of German, English, French and American cultures. All three acknowledge the right of a faculty member to pursue research and publish their findings without restraint, but they differ in regard to the professor’s freedom in a classroom situation. > > In the German tradition, a professor is permitted to attempt to persuade his students to adopt his point of view on a matter, but he is discouraged or prohibited from stating his views, particularly political views, outside the class; in regard to his teaching, there should be no duties required of the professor, no prescribed syllabus, and no restriction to a particular subject. > > An American professor, on the other hand, is expected to present opposing viewpoints about his subject in a fair and objective manner in class, but he is free to have and express his own opinions outside the university setting without fear of recrimination, though it is understood that this freedom is limited by the requirement to perform “other academic duties.” (Kemp, p. 7) (Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure ([http://www.aaup.org/statements/Redbook/1940stat.htm](http://www.aaup.org/statements/Redbook/1940stat.htm)), American Association of University Professors) > > A professor at a public French university, or a researcher in a public research laboratory, is expected, as all civil servants, to behave in a neutral manner and not favor any particular political or religious point of view during the course of his duties. However, the academic freedom of university professors is a fundamental principle recognized by the laws of the Republic, as defined by the Constitutional Council; furthermore, statute law declares about higher education that teachers-researchers [university professors and assistant professors], researchers and teachers are fully independent and enjoy full freedom of speech in the course of their research and teaching activities, provided they respect, following university traditions and the dispositions of this code, principles of tolerance and objectivity (Education Code, L952-2 ([http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/WAspad/UnArticleDeCode?commun=&code=CEDUCATL.rcv&art=L952-2](http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/WAspad/UnArticleDeCode?commun=&code=CEDUCATL.rcv&art=L952-2))). The nomination and promotion of professors is largely done through a process of peer review rather than through normal administrative procedures. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/128 "2005-03-11T22:19:14Z")
You are correct…to a point. I note quite a bit of ‘wiggle room’ there for the universities though to decide to get rid of a professor ‘for cause’. I also note this: ‘it is estimated that only 50 to 75 tenured professors (out of about 280,000) lose their tenure each year.’ So it DOES happen (I assume the majority are for more serious things than this of course). Again, I’ll say that I agree with you on freedom of speech grounds, and that I’d probably spit in the eye of anyone trying to pressure me to get rid of him because they didn’t like what he wrote (even though I also don’t particularly care for what he wrote myself) were I in a position to make that decision of course. However, I need to note that if the University is sufficiently embarrased by all this, that would constitute grounds for dismissal by any reasonable standard (in their eyes)…and it would be up to THEM to decide whats best for the school, not necessarily whats best for Churchill in this case. -XT ---
**Author:** ![zuma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9c0ed/32.png) [@zuma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zuma)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/129 "2005-03-12T15:43:36Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I think the rules of tenure should be what they are now: You can get fired for what you write only if it involves plaigiarism or other offenses of plain intellectual dishonesty. No problem there. Looks like he [got caught.](http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_070193043.html) [Again.](http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_055200531.html) ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/130 "2005-03-14T03:56:59Z")
> [@zuma](#): > > No problem there. Looks like he [got caught.](http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_070193043.html) > [Again.](http://news4colorado.com/topstories/local_story_055200531.html) You know, a lot of people who would go to bat for his dizzy ideas on academic freedom grounds (as in, fellow academics) would readily skin him alive for plagiarism, false reserach, and copyright violations. That stuff really doesn’t go over well with scholars. I’m not just talking about what may be illegal or even criminal. I’m talking total pariah status among his colleagues and peers. This guy’s goose is looking really cooked lately. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/131 "2005-03-29T00:51:39Z")
Update: The University of Colorado has decided Churchill will not be fired for his 9/11 comments. However, allegations that he has committed plaigiarism, and that he has misrepresented himself as an Indian, have been referred to the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct for review. [http://www.legendgames.net/showstory.asp?page=blognews/stories/ES0000034.txt](http://www.legendgames.net/showstory.asp?page=blognews/stories/ES0000034.txt) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/132 "2005-03-29T01:29:23Z")
Here’s a transcript of a radio interview (on the left-wing Democracy Now! show) where Churchill gets a chance to tell his side of the story: [http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/18/157211](http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/18/157211) ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/133 "2005-03-29T03:06:24Z")
The man has never lacked for opportunities to tell his side of the story, **BrainGlutton**. What is at issue is whether he should continue to collect a taxpayer-provided salary to help support his little soapbox. Now, perhaps it would be wrong for the taxpayers to punish Churchill for his writings and speeches alone. Punishing him for embellishing his military record, lying about his race and taking advantage of special programs in this area, ripping off another man’s artwork, plagiarism, petty crime and destruction of property - well, that all seems fair game. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/134 "2005-03-29T06:46:50Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > What is at issue is whether he should continue to collect a taxpayer-provided salary to help support his little soapbox. As an employee of a state university who feels tainted by association, I still would like to point out a small nitpick. Generally, professors at public schools do not get a paycheck from the state, out of state coffers. Universities are the ones who pay faculty and staff salaries and benefits–mostly out the General Fund. The General Fund is _partly_ made up of state appropriations. At a place like Colorado, probably about 1/3. So while the aforementioned jackass has a taxpayer-supported salary, it’s not wholly taxpayer-provided. For the sake of completeness I will also point out that some faculty have their salaries paid almost wholly by non-appropriations funds; for example someone in a named chair, or who is working on a privately-supported grant. So while you’re free to sling insults at Churchill and his ilk, please don’t overgeneralize and suggest the people of Colorado are wholly keeping him in his beer, skittles, and left-wing extremist magazines. They only get part credit for that. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/135 "2005-03-29T11:27:27Z")
Oh, that’s perfectly fair. But it does point to a larger issue, doesn’t it? Do the taxpayers of the State of Colorado have the power to decide how they might want to spend their taxpayer dollars. And does the persence of a Ward Churchill on campus give big headaches to school administrators when they have to justify their mission to state level politicians who control the purse? I recall a controversy when I was a student at the University of Pittsburgh, and a bunch of campus activists wanted ROTC removed from campus because of the military’s policy toward homosexuals. Pitt had a new chancellor at the time, and he was making noises of support toward the activists. Some of us who were College Republicans at the time mentioned this to the man who at the time was the leader of the Republican Caucus in the State Senate, and he said that if it ever came to that, he would simply attach a rider to Pitt’s appropriation forcing reinstatement of ROTC. Soon afterward, the attitude of the university administration changed markedly, and they began to softpedal the issue in a big way. Since you’re an employee of a state university, I’m sure you’re familiar with the behavior. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/136 "2005-03-29T14:53:25Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Some of us who were College Republicans at the time mentioned this to the man who at the time was the leader of the Republican Caucus in the State Senate, and he said that if it ever came to that, he would simply attach a rider to Pitt’s appropriation forcing reinstatement of ROTC. Soon afterward, the attitude of the university administration changed markedly, and they began to softpedal the issue in a big way. > > Since you’re an employee of a state university, I’m sure you’re familiar with the behavior. Well, yes, I do a little government relations work. And legislatures have been known to change the boilerplate of the appropriations bill when they get pissed off at universities. However, in my state at least, it’s not often they can make good on an individual threat against a single university like your Republican Caucus leader boasted. It’s got to get out of committee, be passed by everyone, and be okayed by the governor. Many people, around here anyway, don’t believe it’s good to govern higher education by threats, so these sorts of things are usually handled a little more subtly than that. Universities hear some hoofbeats about an issue, they meet with key legislators to figure out what needs to happen, they find a compromise. There are always some people who believe some independence from the legislature is a good thing (especially with the advent of term limits), so some people will always reject that sort of control, even if the proposal is one people would generally agree with. I would guess that many people, even those who think Ward Churchill is a total ass who should be fired and disgraced, would balk at the idea of the legislature hinging the state appropriation on his termination. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/137 "2005-03-29T15:10:45Z")
He didn’t make good on his threat. Nothing had to be done at all. The threat was enough to ensure the safety of ROTC on campus, especially given the fact that Pennsylvania Democrats can be quite socially conservative. As for the situation with Ward Churchill and the appropriation, it has gone quite that far, especially in an environment where there were other problems with the school. Elizabeth Hoffman, CU’s president, has already resigned not only because of this fiasco but also because of the ongoing football recruiting scandal. Whoever comes in to replace her will have to clean up both messes and smooth over things with the state - a very tall order. Churchill’s screeds have served to shine a spotlight onto himself and his department at CU, and the questions that have been raised are as troubling as his original essays. How has it come to pass that an uncredentialed academic fraud could have been given a position of some authority there? And if he has been getting away with this sort of thing for decades, why is he being called to account for it only now? ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/138 "2005-03-29T18:28:51Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > He didn’t make good on his threat. Nothing had to be done at all. The threat was enough to ensure the safety of ROTC on campus, especially given the fact that Pennsylvania Democrats can be quite socially conservative. > > . . . > > Churchill’s screeds have served to shine a spotlight onto himself and his department at CU, and the questions that have been raised are as troubling as his original essays. How has it come to pass that an uncredentialed academic fraud could have been given a position of some authority there? And if he has been getting away with this sort of thing for decades, why is he being called to account for it only now? I guess I just objected to your characterization of events, which implied that a big bad legislator had merely to make a threat and the university would whimper and fall into line. A sensitivity on my part, perhaps. As for Churchill, I’ve liked to think that no one noticed his plagiarism and poor scholarship because no one actually reads what he writes. Heh. But his tenure committee, at the very least, should have. I am not sure what repercussions the people involved with approving him will face. Hopefully their mistakes won’t be simply swept under the rug once Churchill himself is dealt with. As for “position of authority” this was discussed earlier. A Chairperson job is often seen as an administrative headache which is merely passed on to whatever faculty member is willing to take it on. While it puts that faculty member in some authority, the job itself is not necessarily an honor or a mark of a professor being considered above his peers. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/139 "2005-03-29T18:57:00Z")
I did catch that, yes. But you’re hedging and saying the title isn’t _necessarily_ a mark of higher achievement or esteem. That means, of course, that the reverse might well be true. Certainly Churchill isn’t shy about using this title when he is introduced. Let’s just say that he has at least as much authority as any other full professor, which is bad enough in his case. I don’t think we disagree all that much, **CrankyAsAnOldMan**. My point is merely that universities aren’t a pure ivory tower. To be effective, they have to be very much part of the society they’re within, and this means that academics have to be constrained at least to a degree by societal rules. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2005, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980/140 "2005-03-29T19:21:35Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > My point is merely that universities aren’t a pure ivory tower. To be effective, they have to be very much part of the society they’re within, and this means that academics have to be constrained at least to a degree by societal rules. They **are.** Professor enjoy no immunity from prosecution for crimes or torts, no more than you or I do. Tenure is purely a matter of job security. And there is absolutely no “societal rule” Churchill breached by his 9/11 comments. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-all-the-fuss-over-ward-churchill/290980.md?page=8)