Speech advocates eye UNC

The relationship between professors and university officials can be tense, as a recent situation with a UNC professor and his writings illustrates.

Last October, Gene Nichol, a UNC law professor, published a controversial op-ed in the Raleigh News & Observer that criticized Gov. Pat McCrory.

UNC then made three suggestions to Nichol for future publications — but all have been criticized by advocates of free speech.

The first suggestion was to end his future op-ed columns with the disclaimer that Nichol does not speak for the University.

The American Association of University Professors’ 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure stated professors should indicate they do not speak for their university, though what amounts to indication is debatable.

Law professor Maxine Eichner said she disagreed with the request.

“It should go without saying that any op-ed that a professor writes is expressing their own views,” Eichner said.

Another request was that Nichol no longer sign his op-ed columns that have nothing to do with poverty policy with his title as the director of the Center on Poverty, Work & Opportunity.

Robert Shibley, senior vice president for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, said this request is unreasonable.

“If he is, and he is, the director of that center, then he’s free to say that, as long as he makes it reasonably clear that he’s not speaking for UNC,” Shibley said.

Finally, Nichol was asked to give University officials a day or two heads up before he publishes a column.

Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Jim Dean told the Daily Tar Heel that the purpose of the request is to prepare the university for possible inquiries.

“Letting us know is just a simple courtesy; many others do this,” Dean said.

Media law professor Roy Gutterman of Syracuse University said that while a heads up can be seen as a courtesy, he never gives one to his superiors.

“Any time you have to provide an authority with notification of what you’re writing, it always provides a situation where there might be a what if they don’t like it question coming up,” Gutterman said. “There might be some attempt to censor the professor — that would be my concern.”

Gutterman said he felt that Nichol had spoken as an expert and had fulfilled his role as an expert to inform the public.

“Any time an expert is questioned like this or punished, it’s disheartening — especially when it comes from a university.”

state@dailytarheel.com