‘Censorship by Another Name’

The national campaign to censor U.S. classrooms has adopted new stealth tactics to conceal the attack on intellectual freedom, according to PEN America's Censored Classrooms 2024report.

As a result of educational gag order legislation, faculty are self-censoring what they say, avoiding debate that might better educate and engage their students but could run afoul of state laws.

PEN America started collecting data on censorship in education in 2021. According to the new report, eight bills or policies were enacted in 2024 that the organization classifies as "direct restrictions on educational speech in the classroom."

Additionally, the report reveals that five other higher education bills were enacted that do not directly censor universities and colleges, but have indirect effects on academic freedom. For example, the bills address "politicization of university governance; bans on diversity, equity, and inclusion; and restrictions on faculty tenure."

PEN America sites three tactics that campaigns are using to advance censorship in higher education:

1. "Disguise educational censorship legislation by allying it with some worthy or popular cause."
2. "Censor indirectly, by undermining the support structures at universities that protect intellectual freedom in the classroom, rather than directly, by placing official restrictions on speech."
3. "Whenever possible, accomplish censorship by informal pressure, bullying, or threats rather than formal legislation."

"This is censorship by another name," Jeremy C. Young, PEN America's Freedom to Learn program director and lead author of the report, said in a statement. "What's occurring in our universities is a coordinated assault on free expression, now obscured by claims of fairness and neutrality, making it harder to combat."

While the number of educational gag orders filed in state legislatures in 2024 was lower than last year at 56, more became law compared to last year. Besides the gag orders, 29 bills that target higher education institutions were introduced, "the highest percentage of these bills ever proposed in a single year." Out of the 29, five became law.

The PEN America report analyzes how legislators disguise censorship through broad and misleading claims of how the bill advances higher education. For example, Indiana's SB 202, one of the most egregious higher education censorship laws, is hidden behind the language of "viewpoint diversity." According to PEN America, SB 202 has two consequences: it incentivizes bad teaching, and it stifles faculty speech.

President of the National Council for Higher EducationAlec Thomson said that he has noticed a general concern among faculty about what they choose to say in the classroom.

"I see that they are unaware of what they should be speaking on or talking about without fear of stepping on the wrong kind of rule or regulation," Thomson said. "And so, there's a bit of trepidation about approaching subjects, especially in certain classrooms, I suspect, or areas."

Pat Heintzelman is the president of the Texas Faculty Association. She has also seen a chilling effect happen through overreach by administration. Heintzelman has talked to faculty who fear choosing certain literature for their classrooms and avoid whole topics. Because of this, she said there has been detrimental impact on faculty and students.

"It certainly causes a student to have much less comprehensive education," Heintzelman said. "There are going to be so many things they don't know about that they never read, they never study, they never hear opposing viewpoints on. That's the impact. The students are the losers."

When addressing the second tactic, indirect censorship, the report says that while PEN America does not oppose institutional neutrality policies, higher education institutions should decide their policies for themselves while consulting faculty, staff and students.

"After all, there are many occasions when university leaders actually have a legitimate need to express their values-in the wake of a campus incident, to confer an honorary degree, to promote faculty scholarship, or to inaugurate some new research center focused on a pressing social issue," the report says.

Heintzelman agreed that decisions about certain policies should be made by the institutions, not the government.

"Why do they want to come in and tell the experts in the field what they can and can't say, what they can and can't cover?" Heintzelman said. "Higher education is under attack."

She said that legislatures are concerned that higher education professionals are trying to "indoctrinate" students into one viewpoint, which is not the case.

"I've met faculty from around the country, and nobody that I have talked to sees higher education as doing anything like that," Heintzelman said. "It's presenting multiple views and challenging the student to think and consider other points of view."

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.