College students this past spring used on-campus encampments , including at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, to protest Israel's prosecution of the war on Hamas. New Universities of Wisconsin and UW-Madison policies have place strict limits on institutional statements by the UW system, its universities and university departments, requring viewpoint neutrality about matters outside the university system. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

A new Universities of Wisconsin policy requires statements in the name of UW institutions to avoid expressing a point of view on political or social controversies.

On the heels of the new UW system policy, announced Friday, UW-Madison instituted a policy Friday that echoed the system document. The policy change was first reported on Friday by the UW-Madison student newspaper, The Daily Cardinal.

“Institutional statements issued by university leaders should be limited to matters that directly affect the operations and core mission of the university, and should maintain viewpoint neutrality in any reference to any matter of political or social controversy,” the UW System policy states.

The policy applies to statements issued through university channels and that “are likely to be perceived as speaking in the name of and on behalf of” the university system, any of the university campuses, or any particular department, center, division, program or other university entity.

It applies to UW System President Jay Rothman, system vice presidents, university chancellors or a variety of other academic officers.

The policy permits statements about regulations, legislation or court rulings that directly affect the university. But those statements are only allowed to share support or opposition when authorized by Rothman or a university chancellor.

Both the UW system and the UW-Madison policies include disclaimers emphasizing that they are not intended to infringe on university employees’ free speech rights.

“This policy does not apply to statements made by faculty or staff in exercising academic freedom with respect to scholarship, teaching, and intellectual debate, nor to faculty or staff acting on their own behalf in their capacity as individuals and not purporting to speak in the name of and on behalf of any university or unit,” the UW system policy states.

The UW system’s policy follows a statement issued in May by the UW-Milwaukee  expressing support for a cease fire in Israel’s war on Hamas in the Palestinian territory of Gaza. The statement also included a condemnation of the Hamas attack Oct. 7, 2023 that preceded Israel’s attacks. The statement followed negotiations between the university administration and student groups on the campus who protested Israel’s prosecution of the war. The statement and related actions at UWM prompted criticism from Jewish groups as well as Rothman at the time.

Asked Monday whether the UWM events prompted the change, Mark Pitsch, director of media relations for the UW system, told the Wisconsin Examiner in an email message, “The Universities of Wisconsin, along with peers across the country, for years have discussed how to handle institutional statements and President Rothman decided the time had come for a formal policy.”

In a message to students, staff and faculty Friday explaining the new UW-Madison policy, Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin acknowledged she has been among campus leaders throughout the U.S. who have chosen “to make public statements about or take positions on major issues, events, and controversies.”

Mnookin wrote that “I have come to believe that this practice is problematic,” and that such statements delivered by an institutional leader “may, however inadvertently, discourage free expression among the plurality of voices within our university” and “risks crowding out other points of view.”

That applies to messages aimed at comforting and supporting people who are “hurting and suffering in the wake of something that has occurred in the broader world,” she wrote. “And yet, while some may feel comforted by a given message, others may feel excluded or unseen by what is said, and by what is left unsaid.”

As of Monday the American Association of University Professors Wisconsin chapter had no comment on the new policy.

One especially vocal opponent has been Nathan Kalmoe, who holds a staff position at UW-Madison and who sharply criticized the policy on the social media platform BlueSky shortly after it was announced.

Kalmoe is the executive administrative director at the Center for Communication and Civic Renewal in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication. In an interview Monday he specified he was speaking for himself and not for the center, the school or the university.

The disclaimers in Madison and UW System policies protecting the right to free speech of individuals are important, Kalmoe said. He contends, however, that the university as an institution and its departments and other units should be free to take stances on significant matters.

He cited as an example statements that the UW-Madison chancellor’s office as well as a number of university departments and programs issued in support of the Black community in the aftermath of the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd in 2020.

The university’s declared commitment to equality “means recognizing that certain controversial issues are a direct threat to equality in our society,” Kalmoe said in an interview.

John Lucas, assistant vice chancellor for public affairs at UW-Madison, said in an email message that the new policy “requires a situation to have a direct impact on campus operations or the university’s mission for the university to take an institutional position.”

When that does not apply, the policy allows for an informational statement from the institution “to acknowledge the situation and provide support and resources,” Lucas said. “In all cases, it would also allow faculty members, in their individual capacity, to continue sharing their own views in all manner of ways.”

Asked whether the new policy would have permitted statements of the sort that followed Floyd’s death, Lucas said it was “hard to retroactively assess a George Floyd statement,” but added, “that was a situation that also had a direct impact locally and on campus operations.”

Nevertheless, Kalmoe said issues in wider society such as racism, sexism, antisemitism or islamophobia can have a direct effect on students and their wellbeing on campus and should prompt university support. By treating them instead as subjects of controversy requiring a neutral perspective, he said, it falls short.

Kalmoe also believes the university has a responsibility to set a moral example on such subjects.

“If the campus is muzzled on those kinds of things that are directly related to our mission and to the intellectual and moral values of the university,” he said, “then we’re removing from public discourse a vital voice that influences how people think about these issues, and forfeiting the opportunity for leadership on these issues that are directly related to our values.”