Digital Social Hour: How 39 Professors Silenced Academic Freedom | Ann Atkinson DSH #1068

Release Date: January 7, 2025

Host: Sean Kelly
Guest: Ann Atkinson

Introduction

In this compelling episode of Digital Social Hour, host Sean Kelly engages in a profound discussion with Ann Atkinson, the former Executive Director of the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development at Barrett, the Honors College at Arizona State University (ASU). Atkinson shares her firsthand experience with cancel culture within academia, detailing how 39 professors orchestrated a campaign that led to her dismissal and the dismantling of a successful academic program. This conversation delves deep into the mechanisms of academic suppression, the broader implications for higher education, and actionable solutions to safeguard free speech and academic freedom.

Background: The Lewis Center and Ann Atkinson's Role

Ann Atkinson begins by outlining her role at ASU and the mission of the T.W. Lewis Center. She emphasized the center's commitment to bridging academia with real-world applications, focusing on entrepreneurship, career success, personal finance, and traditional American values such as hard work, personal responsibility, faith, family, community, civics, and civic duty.

[02:40] Ann Atkinson: "Our center existed to teach entrepreneurship, career, success, personal finance, self-awareness, happiness. Really great. We're great, comfortable, practical topics."

Atkinson highlights the success of the center, noting significant student engagement and the inclusion of prominent speakers like Robert Kiyosaki, Dennis Prager, and Charlie Kirk. These initiatives aimed to provide students with diverse perspectives and practical knowledge outside the conventional academic curriculum.

The Incident: Invitation of Controversial Speakers

The turning point came when Atkinson decided to invite Charlie Kirk, Dennis Prager, and Robert Kiyosaki to speak at ASU. Contrary to student reactions, which were largely non-confrontational, the faculty and deans launched a vehement condemnation campaign against these events.

[03:16] Ann Atkinson: "And the faculty launched a condemnation campaign that led to the loss of my job as executive director. It led to the dismantling of the entire Lewis center, which was a million-dollar program."

Despite the event's success, with thousands of students attending and positive media coverage, the faculty framed the gathering as promoting "white supremacy" and "dangerous hate speech." This misrepresentation was particularly striking given the diverse backgrounds of the speakers, including Dennis Prager's Orthodox Jewish identity and Dr. Radago Pollan's Sri Lankan heritage.

[10:15] Ann Atkinson: "He's Asian. Dennis Prager is an orthodox Jew, by the way. Prayers to Dennis Prager. He's in the hospital. We're lifting him up as he recovers from a really, really bad accident."

The faculty's reaction was not merely vocal but resulted in tangible repercussions, including the removal of promotional materials and the termination of key staff members associated with the Lewis Center.

Consequences: Dismantling of the Lewis Center and Personal Repercussions

As a result of the faculty-led campaign, Atkinson lost her position and the Lewis Center was disbanded. The center, a significant investment for ASU, was dissolved, and positions like the Events Operations Manager were eliminated.

[04:34] Ann Atkinson: "So they took all of us out that had anything to do with this. And again, it wasn't public protesters. It wasn't students picketing. They were the faculty and the deans of the Honors College."

Atkinson's dismissal was justified by the provost, who stated that inviting controversial speakers necessitated facing the consequences. This decision underscored the increasing intolerance for diverse viewpoints within higher education institutions.

[11:44] Ann Atkinson: "The new dean of the Honors College fired me. And the provost said, well, you know, you invited these controversial speakers, and you need to face the consequences for that."

Broader Implications: Academic Freedom and Ideological Homogeneity

Atkinson discusses how the incident at ASU reflects a pervasive issue across American higher education: the suppression of free speech and the enforcement of ideological conformity. She points out that the majority of faculty members tend to align with liberal or Democratic ideologies, which stifles diverse perspectives and academic discourse.

[04:51] Ann Atkinson: "Oh, this issue is so pervasive. ASU should be on the better end of the spectrum. But the college fix just came out with research in the past couple of days. They looked at party affiliation within just ASU faculty through public records requests. And 15 to 1, these professors at ASU are Democrat to Republican. And that is Very representative of what happens within the university."

This ideological homogeneity leads to self-censorship among both faculty and students, limiting the exploration of diverse ideas and fostering an environment where dissenting opinions are marginalized.

[14:26] Ann Atkinson: "But the issue is that in higher ed they have, they're filling their own talent pipeline. And more and more it. It's become this ideological battleground where I think these professors really feel that they're right and good and protecting people from dangerous things."

Impact on Students: Fear and Self-Censorship

One of the most alarming outcomes of this hostile academic environment is the pervasive fear among students to express dissenting opinions. Atkinson cites a survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Free Expression, revealing that only 13% of students feel comfortable disagreeing with their professors on controversial topics, and a mere 10% are comfortable doing so publicly.

[13:53] Ann Atkinson: "And publicly, only 10% of these students are comfortable disagreeing with their professors."

This fear of academic reprisals not only hinders intellectual growth but also undermines the foundational purpose of higher education: to encourage critical thinking and the free exchange of ideas.

Actionable Solutions: Syllabi Transparency and Legislative Efforts

To combat the erosion of academic freedom, Atkinson advocates for increased transparency in course syllabi. She compares the current opaque system to buying a car without knowing its specifications, arguing that students deserve to see course details before enrolling.

[19:19] Ann Atkinson: "One solution. No one is talking about syllabi transparency. Think about when you go to buy a car. You know what you're buying when you leave the lot. When a student signs up for a course, most of the time there's no syllabus and they sign up and the topic sounds great and the course description sounds great, but they don't know what they're buying."

Atkinson has been actively working with the Arizona legislature to introduce syllabi transparency legislation, aimed at empowering students to make informed decisions about their courses. This initiative seeks to prevent the hidden indoctrination of ideologies under the guise of standard academic subjects.

[19:19] Ann Atkinson: "And we've been working with our legislature in Arizona on syllabi transparency legislation that would just return power to the students, let them see what they're signing up for before they pay for it, before they, before they put it into their schedule."

Despite facing significant pushback from educators resistant to oversight, Atkinson remains steadfast in her pursuit of this essential reform.

Legislative Response and Continuing Struggle

The public outcry and media attention led to legislative action in Arizona, resulting in the formation of an ad hoc committee on Freedom of Expression in Arizona's public universities. This committee held comprehensive hearings where prominent figures like Dennis Prager and Seth Leibson testified, bringing national attention to the issue.

[17:17] Ann Atkinson: "They had a five-hour legislative hearing. Dennis Prager came, he testified. Seth Leibson, who is a phenomenal conservative radio host in Arizona, he came to testify."

Despite these efforts, ASU's response was largely reactive. They conducted an internal investigation, which Atkinson criticizes as superficial and unreflective of the actual suppression occurring on campus.

[17:41] Ann Atkinson: "ASU started a new free speech center. I still haven't seen who's running it. What are they actually going to do? That sounds great, but what's the substance there?"

The legislative push, however, signifies a critical step towards addressing and mitigating the suppression of academic freedom in higher education.

Conclusion: The Path Forward

Ann Atkinson emphasizes the urgency of addressing academic suppression and fostering an environment where diverse viewpoints can coexist and thrive. She calls on students, parents, and educators to advocate for transparency and resist the forces that seek to silence dissent.

[21:47] Ann Atkinson: "People have to wake up. They have to see what's happening. Ask parents, ask your students. Students, think to yourself, how many times have you or a friend signed up for a class thinking it would be one thing, and then finding out it's actually an ideological indoctrination course on Marxism?"

Atkinson encourages individuals to follow her on social media and engage with the movement to promote syllabi transparency and protect academic freedom.

[21:47] Ann Atkinson: "So follow me. Help the mission. This is a fight. It will continue. It's a big one and we're not going away."

Key Takeaways

• Academic Suppression: The episode highlights how ideological conformity among faculty can lead to the suppression of diverse viewpoints and academic freedom.

• Impact on Students: Fear of academic reprisals fosters self-censorship, undermining the core mission of higher education.

• Actionable Solutions: Implementing syllabi transparency and advocating for legislative reforms are critical steps towards safeguarding free speech in academia.

• Ongoing Struggle: The fight against academic suppression is ongoing, necessitating collective action from students, educators, and policymakers.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Ann Atkinson on Orthodoxy in Academia:

  [00:30] Ann Atkinson: "Orthodoxy. And it's not a conservative Democrat model, but it's really about people that are free thinking libertarians, people that value hard work, that think we're all equal despite our skin color or where we're from, that we all are deserving of respect. If you don't subscribe to what's really the pervasive orthodoxy, I mean, you're, you're ostracized."

• Ann Atkinson on Facing Consequences:

  [11:44] Ann Atkinson: "The new dean of the Honors College fired me. And the provost said, well, you know, you invited these controversial speakers, and you need to face the consequences for that."

• Ann Atkinson on Syllabi Transparency:

  [19:19] Ann Atkinson: "No one is talking about syllabi transparency. Think about when you go to buy a car. You know what you're buying when you leave the lot. When a student signs up for a course, most of the time there's no syllabus and they sign up and the topic sounds great and the course description sounds great, but they don't know what they're buying."

Final Thoughts

This episode of Digital Social Hour sheds light on the insidious ways in which academic freedom is being undermined within higher education institutions. Ann Atkinson's courageous account serves as a call to action for all stakeholders in the educational landscape to recognize and combat the forces of suppression and to champion a more open and intellectually diverse academic environment.

Follow Ann Atkinson:

• Twitter: @AtkinsonAZ
• Instagram: @AnnAtkinson

Join the Conversation:
Stay informed and support efforts to promote academic freedom and syllabi transparency by following Ann Atkinson and engaging with legislative initiatives in your state.

Note: This summary excludes advertisements, intros, outros, and non-content segments to focus solely on the substantive discussion between Sean Kelly and Ann Atkinson.