Several universities say The Daily Telegraph and a right-wing think tank “selectively misquoted” a school document to make it falsely appear as if students and staff were “banned” from “disagreeing with Indigenous people”.
The claim was contained in an exclusive Telegraph story last week based on a study by the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) that claimed most Australian universities were “hostile to free speech”.
Crikey can reveal that none of the universities criticised were afforded a chance to respond by the IPA or Telegraph, that many of the story’s claims are misleading, and that some of the guidelines the article decried as undermining free speech are consistent with News Corp Australia’s own staff policies.
“Free speech is dying on Australian university campuses — with bizarre woke policies such as bans on disagreeing with Indigenous people, using upper case letters or uttering simple words like ‘man’ fuelling the decline, a new audit has found,” the article began.
The study’s author, IPA research fellow Brianna McKee, included a list of examples of university policies that the Telegraph framed as a “crackdown on campus debate”.
Number one on the list: “At Central Queensland University (CQU), a protocol says that ‘direct verbal confrontation’ and ‘expressing disagreement’ with Indigenous people should be avoided to ‘preserve consensus’.”
But a CQU spokesperson explained in a statement to Crikey that the IPA had misquoted the protocol.
“The IPA and Daily Telegraph have selectively misquoted from [the university’s] ‘Engaging and Communicating with Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander or First Nations People Protocol’,” they said.
“In context, the protocol outlines a number of helpful considerations for communicating with Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people. It states that ‘Direct verbal confrontation is unsettling for most people’ (not culturally specific) and advises that ‘expressing disagreement may be avoided’ by some Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people ‘to preserve consensus’ (a statement which is intended as advice around cultural norms, not an edict for staff or students).”
Like every other university mentioned in the story that responded to questions from Crikey, the spokesperson said CQU had not been contacted for comment.
“CQU was not contacted by the IPA or Daily Telegraph for comment or clarification, whose ‘research’ on this occasion has left something to be desired,” the spokesperson said.
Charles Sturt University (CSU), too, said its policies had been portrayed in a misleading way.
The Telegraph story claimed that “Charles Sturt forbids students from ‘inciting negative or degrading dialogue'”.
However, a CSU spokesperson told Crikey that the newspaper had cherrypicked from the policy.
“In the context of free speech it is noteworthy that the full guideline reads: ‘Consider the feelings and dignity of others, respect opposing views and do not incite negative or degrading dialogue’,” the spokesperson said.
In another misleading claim, the Telegraph said Southern Cross University “forbids students from typing a social post in upper case as ‘shouting'”. But a spokesperson for the school said that policy only applies to people authorised to use official university social media accounts, not across the board on private accounts.
Another school that pushed back on the reporting was Curtin University, which the Telegraph said had banned posts on its social media channels that risked “potential brand damage”.
A spokesperson said the university values academic freedom and that the social media rule only applied to those who operated official university accounts.
“It is disappointing that the study referred to has not looked at the full picture and that both the study author and the media outlet did not contact Curtin,” the spokesperson said.
It’s likely that the same online behaviour targeted by the Curtin policy would be banned under News Corp Australia’s own social media policy. Staff at the media behemoth are told they “must at all times use best endeavours to manage their social media accounts in a manner that does not reflect poorly” on News Corp.
Notably, that sentence refers to employees’ “own social media accounts”, not just official News Corp accounts.
Other company rules say employees must “use appropriate language” and avoid “obscene and/or highly derogatory language”.
Crikey understands there is also a News Corp rule against failing to “comply with … policies relating to discrimination and harassment” and “prohibited conduct”.
As Crikey has previously reported, News Corp’s internal policies — including encouraging respect of staffers’ chosen pronouns — contradict some of its public reporting about “woke” cultural edicts requiring people to walk on “linguistic eggshells”, in the words of Sky News host Andrew Bolt.
After Crikey sent the IPA the replies from the universities, the think tank said its position had only been “reinforced” by the “disingenuous” pushback.
“University administrators have been caught out and are now being disingenuous about what their anti-free speech policies really mean for students and academics alike,” study author McKee said.
“It is revealing that none of the universities have contested the underlying findings of the IPA’s research, which is that freedom of speech is being suppressed, and conformity demanded, via their policies on university campuses.
“Debate and the contest of ideas is the very essence of university life, and the opportunity for Australian students and academics to freely debate critical issues is being significantly eroded,” McKee said.
The Daily Telegraph did not respond to a request for comment.
In future please write IPA as ipa. Much less shouty.
: )
Or, more wordy, ‘the local representative of global US fossil fueled libertarian* ‘Koch Atlas Network”
*Orwellian doublespeak, too often it promotes authoritarian policies for big business.
Here’s one fulcrum, with influence locally promoting American culture & law, of their various political activities in the US via their ‘bill mill’ ALEC https://alec.org/issue/free-speech/ with focus to on campus, donors and commercial; they don’t seem very keen on general free speech by the <99%?
The visceral hate of education by News and the Right wingers never stops. I suppose they hate having their lies called out by intelligent people.
Clearly NooseCorp prefers the standards set centuries ago of only ‘official’ teachings are permitted, all other teachings are branded ‘heretical’ and punishable by severe penalties.
I don’t think they regard their ‘others’ as ‘intelligent’ – because those others won’t swallow, unquestioningly, the pap of RWNJ dogma-logical pre-digested ideology – ‘others’ are prone to questioning handed-down infallibility….. And they vote differently.
I don’t think they hate education, given most of them attended Uni. It’s just an appeal to the “outer suburbs” and if they are super lucky, get a little culture war win
Just like in the days of Menzies where higher education was the preserve of the wealthy while the best of the peasantry were allowed to fight each other for the few scholarships available. All designed on the British model aimed at ensuring only the right people were educated above the level required for basic jobs.
The Murdoch business model tends not to work as well where the audience have higher levels of education.
Same is apparent in the US, UK, Hungary, Turkey and Russia; free speech and other cultural issues e.g. anti-LGBT, anti-woke etc. are more Trojan horses endeavouring to nobble higher education (K12 too) in humanities, sciences esp. climate, educated youth and empowered citizens.
It’s the underlying taxonomy of education for high outcomes that is the target in my opinion, underpinned by Bloom’s Taxonomy or hierarchy of skills used in western education curricula, syllabi and content.
The key elements are knowledge, understanding, application, analysis, evaluation and synthesis; latter three they wish to avoid to dumb down education, preferring the authority of beliefs.
The target imo, is Bloom’s Taxonomy or hierarchy of skills used in western education curricula, syllabi and content.
The key elements are knowledge, understanding, application, analysis, evaluation and synthesis; latter three they wish to avoid to dumb down education, preferring the authority of beliefs and existing hierarchy.
Cannot post individual skills due to the mad mod bot, so here’s a link https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/
They don’t hate education, they hate the wrong kind education and especially the wrong kind of people receiving it.
Calling the IPA a “think” tank is a bit of a stretch. It would be bankrupt without Gina Rinehart funding it.
What about “brains trussed”?
The production and dissemination of right-wing propaganda is seldom undertaken as a simple profit-making enterprise like a conventional business, although of course newspapers were highly profitable back in the day. Plenty of extremely rich bigots are more than willing to fund such efforts such as think tanks or media empires for reasons including vanity, ideology, class warfare and plain malice. When you’ve enough money, such expense counts more as a hobby than a business.
And how on earth is it registered as a charity? What charitable works do they do?
It seems to support and give a sense of purpose and a voice to a select group of unfortunate and deluded misfits who might otherwise struggle to feel wanted in society. That’s sort of charitable, isn’t it?
Charity begins at home.
In the UK, a Canadian ex. comms person for a related ‘think tank’ described them as oxymoronic i.e. PR lobbying outfits over populated with pseudo intellectuals and faux experts, but their messaging and talking points are helped by the financial, economic, science and research illiteracy of media and politicians.
A charitable woman https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-17/gina-rinehart-pressured-son-john-hancock-s-lawyer/102742080
Presumably that chap from the Telegraph who appears on Shaun Micallef’s Mad as Hell to discuss that rag’s headlines would assure us this too is ‘all just a bit of fun’. It certainly is not journalism.
The IPA seems to be right behind the Morrison/right’s “never apologise, never admit error” approach to making their “point”. And so they drift further and further out into their own imaginary land, full of imaginary enemies….
“..never apologise, never admit error..” and, strenuously deny(the latest).