When a university dean sends incoming freshmen a letter saying our university stands for “freedom of inquiry and expression,” “rigorous debate and discussion,” “diversity of opinion and ideas,” “civility and mutual respect”— so far that’s boring. We all agree … platitudes … so what.

But when University of Chicago Dean John Ellison goes on to say that means “we” are against “trigger warnings,” canceling invited speakers because “their topics might prove controversial,” and “intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” this is true media meat. It became moderately viral, winning the praise of editorialists, columnists, think tank, cable news, talk radio, and, of course,  les blogosophes. (Over 2000 Google search results at this writing, less than 1 week after the letter was published.)

Here are three things to remember whenever you see news reporting and opinion writing about college campuses … and safe spaces.

1. The reporters don’t talk to the students. They typically rely on “authoritative sources,” which gives establishment framing to their stories. Writing on deadline, they will contact a dean or celebrity faculty member or outside academic expert. If they do talk to students, you can imagine how they are selected. The Chicago Tribune reporters are a few miles away from the Hyde Park campus, but neither their news story nor their editorial about Dean Ellison’s letter quoted any students.

2. Look at the student newspaper. If it’s a good one, you may learn more and get better perspective from it than from corporate media. After all, the students are there and the newspaper is accountable to their community. Though you got a glimpse of a student critique of Ellison in the NY Times story, you can get a devastating dissection in the Chicago Maroon’s interview with Student Government President Eric Holmberg.

3. Media love moral panic as much as the real thing. Are safe spaces and trigger warnings really an issue at U. of C.? And are they the threat to academic freedom claimed by conservatives?

“The University is creating this threat of trigger warnings and safe spaces that really isn’t an active conversation on campus,” Holmberg says.  The demand for safe spaces is not, as Ellison says, for “intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own.” University officials in fact did set up a safe space for LGBTQ students, and Dean Ellison is even listed on the U of C website as an “ally.” (“With friends like that …”)

 So what’s the point? Maybe the letter is really PR pandering to conservative (and liberal) donors who don’t approve of  LGBTQ safe spaces  … or too much attention to minority students or that Title IX investigation … And all that disruptive student activism!

And maybe, Holmberg says, the dean’s “strategy is to create a false fight for free speech to ignore the concrete struggles that are going on.” As he and former Student Government President Tyler Kissinger pointed out, university officials insulated themselves from student questioning and demands — Kissinger points to student demands for a living wage for campus workers, support for sexual assault survivors or campus police policies (add here students demanding divestment from fossil fuel companies).    School officials claim to love “the free exchange of ideas … diversity of opinion and background … rigorous debate, discussion and even disagreement,” but, says Kissinger, they themselves “retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own.”

Safe spaces for deans?
“Of anyone else on campus, the administration is far more fearful of challenge and discomfort than any student I know,” [Holmberg] said. “It’s ironic that during my time at the University of Chicago, administrators have continuously sought to create a comfortable space for themselves free of challenge by avoiding engagement with student leaders.”

What are “safe spaces”? Not the dean’s stereotype.  No one thinks there is anything wrong when the jocks and frat boys hang out together, but some people get mad when the black students sit together in the cafeteria or want “a room of their own.” Northwestern University President Morton Schapiro makes this point, citing a comment by a Jewish student: “She argued that everyone needed a safe space and that for her, as a Jew, it had been the Hillel House. She knew that when she was there, she could relax and not worry about being interrogated by non-Jews about Israeli politics or other concerns. So why is the Black House an issue in the eyes of some alumni who write saying that we should integrate all of our students into a single community rather than isolate them into groups? I have never gotten a single note questioning the presence of Hillel, of our Catholic Center or any of the other safe spaces on campus.”

Larger issue: This is really an attack on activism and protest. There is something else going on here. Dean Ellison does what the right-wing culture warriors do when he lumps together these very different things: safe spaces and trigger warnings, speech codes that ban hate speech or personal attacks, and protests against or disruption of guest speakers. Lumping these things together and talking about them in the abstract allows people to attack all protest and activism while disguising their attack as a defense of civil liberties, academic freedom, or individual freedom.