After reading Student Life’s Oct. 27 article on WashU’s drop in free speech rankings, I felt disappointed in our community. I’m not upset about our lower free speech rankings, though. I’m disappointed that people think that WashU is actively suppressing free speech. I’d argue that perceptions of limitations on freedom of expression are the result of a faulty narrative and a subsequent failure to take advantage of opportunities for free speech.

The particular ranking cited by this article was done by College Pulse — an organization that pays students to take short surveys about their opinions on campus issues. College Pulse slightly adjusts scores based on the administration’s public statements that researchers have access to, but the three statistics cited by Student Life — administrative support, self-censorship, and comfort expressing ideas — are largely based on the perceptions of just 463 WashU student respondents. These rankings are not a reflection of absolute truth, but rather, the feelings of a subset of students.

When College Pulse emailed students to fill out their survey about free speech, I think it’s obvious that students who had been involved in campus protests or had strong opinions on the University’s supposed suppression of free speech were the ones most likely to take interest in responding. Conversely, those who are indifferent to the topic or even supportive of the University are significantly less likely to feel motivated to share their thoughts. 

So, I have no doubt that a large portion of the survey respondents were attendees or sympathizers of last year’s protests. The disproportionate response rate was exacerbated by groups like Resist WashU and Jewish Students for Palestine methodically characterizing the University’s response as a nefarious plot to prevent students from expressing their political opinions. 

I write this in an attempt to challenge the popular narrative that people’s ability to express themselves is being actively suppressed on this campus.  

At the time of publication, not a single student has been disciplined by the University only for expressing their opinions about the Israel-Hamas war. Students have been disciplined for engaging in protests that happened to include expressions of support for Palestine. However, those protesters were explicitly disciplined for breaking clear University policies that prohibit encampments, using amplified noise, and blocking the regular use of campus spaces. They weren’t disciplined for the views they expressed, but rather, the activities they chose to engage in while expressing them.

Numerous events involving political expression have occurred at WashU since Oct. 7 that followed University policy, and therefore, were allowed to continue without interference. The false claim that University discipline is a response to the protesters’ use of their free speech, rather than to their breaking of campus policies, is a damaging logical fallacy. This is a malicious attempt by groups like Resist WashU to obscure the matter, avoid punishment, and leverage the University to meet their demands. This narrative also misleads the greater student body who then further perpetuates it.

I write this article in hopes that the general student body will take a moment to reflect on the true state of the University and understand that the administration is not the obstacle towards our freedom of expression. The obstacle is us. 

I went to a Dialogue Across Differences (DxD) event on Oct. 29 and was greatly disappointed in our student body. This particular event was the second of a two-part series, the first focusing on Islamophobia and the second on antisemitism. There were ten people present. Eight were there on behalf of the DxD team. Only two came by choice: myself and the president of Student Union, senior Hussein Amuri. 

There were 463 respondents to the free speech survey, and only two people showed up to an event explicitly geared towards facilitating absolute freedom of expression. 

This is just one example of many opportunities the University has given us to freely express our thoughts on the war in Gaza. Many members of the administration have had personal meetings with numerous student leaders; they’ve held a town hall for affinity groups; and they’ve interfaced with SU on multiple occasions. They even posted easels around campus with the Campus Demonstrations and Disruption Policies so that students could easily craft their protests to follow the University’s rules while still accomplishing their goals of political advocacy. 

So, what’s our response to all these opportunities? Protests that explicitly violate campus policies? Complaints about suppression of our First Amendment rights? Resolutions that call for the resignation of the same Chancellor who teaches a free speech course and hosts discussions on free speech?

It’s up to us. Freedom of speech is alive and well at WashU. If we keep spreading the narrative that WashU is a place of suppression of expression, then yes, it will be a space of uncomfortable silence. We, the student body, have both passively and actively created that perceived reality for ourselves. 

The University has gone above and beyond in providing us with spaces and guidelines to express ourselves, so now it’s our responsibility to take advantage of those. If you are truly upset about a lack of opportunities to express yourself, you have to show up to events like DxD. Harnessing these opportunities to respectfully and openly dialogue with one another is the only way that we’ll truly embrace our First Amendment rights and foster a culture of mutual respect for each other’s shared values of human life, justice, and peace.