USC valedictorian’s grad speech is canceled: ‘The university has betrayed me’

essentialsaltes · Apr 18, 2024

When Asna Tabassum learned that USC had disinvited her from speaking at next month’s graduation, she hadn’t yet planned what she would say in her remarks, beyond that she would convey a message of hope.

University leaders who announced the decision Monday, after pro-Israel groups criticized a link on Tabassum’s Instagram page as evidence of her being antisemitic, didn’t know the theme of her speech because she hadn’t shared it with them, the class valedictorian said an interview with The Times on Tuesday.

In keeping Tabassum from giving a three- to five-minute speech in front of 65,000 people during the May 10 ceremony, USC Provost Andrew T. Guzman cited the need to “maintain campus safety and security.” The university alluded to unnamed threats but has not publicly detailed them.

The backlash against Tabassum, who was chosen as valedictorian by a university committee from nearly 100 applicants with GPAs of 3.98 or above, was unusual, even at a time of intense campus strife between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel activists, because it didn’t involve anything she said or did. The opposition appeared to stem mostly from a link on her Instagram profile to a website she did not create.

[And allegedly the actual college decision was based on 'safety', implying that it had nothing to do with her, but rather that if "anti-pro-Palestinian" (let's call them) groups complain loudly and threateningly enough, they can cancel speech on a college campus.]

Tabassum, who minored in resistance to genocide, suggested her opponents were mistaken about her views and her studies.

The program, an official minor at USC, requires students to enroll in five courses from a list that includes several on the Holocaust as well as on the Armenian genocide and other genocides, such as targeted killings of Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994.

--

On Tuesday, Joel Curran, USC’s senior vice president of communications, said the “final decision” on the matter rested with university President Carol Folt.

Folt was not available for an interview.

[I wonder if the scene of various college presidents being haled before Congressional subcommittees may have affected her thinking.]

essentialsaltes · Apr 18, 2024

Did USC set ‘very bad precedent’ by cancelling valedictorian speech over safety threats?

Five months ago, USC cited safety as a rationale for banning economics professor John Strauss, who is Jewish, from campus after student activists said they felt threatened when he approached them at a protest and said “Hamas are murderers. ... I hope they all are killed.”

[That seems like an overreaction if it's just the words. The school may have been swayed by edited [but not manipulated] videos that made it unclear he was only talking about Hamas.]

Now the university is again citing safety concerns for canceling a Muslim valedictorian’s speech at its May commencement ceremony.

Free speech advocates note that the decision regarding Asna Tabassum, a USC senior who is graduating with a major in biomedical engineering, was not caused by anything she said or planned to say. Instead, the university said, online discussion had taken on an “alarming tenor” as activists objected to her minor — resistance to genocide — and a link to a pro-Palestinian website Tabassum had shared on her Instagram profile.

“This sets a very bad precedent,” said Alex Morey, director of campus rights advocacy with the nonprofit civil rights group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. “Moving forward, are they going to cancel every speech that could have anything to do with Israel-Palestine because they’re worried about ‘safety concerns’?”

“A university, except in the most exceptional cases, should not be giving in to threats of violence in order to suppress speakers,” said Keith Whittington, a political scientist at Princeton University and author of “Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech.”

“Here, we have capitulated to a ‘heckler’s veto’ before the fact,” [USC communications professor Christina Dunbar-Hester, chapter president of the USC American Assn. of University Professors] said. “Why is the burden of a potential threat placed on the shoulders of the valedictorian rather than those who would disrupt her?”

--

Last month, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas halted a public lecture from a visiting Israeli professor 15 minutes after he started speaking when pro-Palestinian protesters burst into the room.

Asaf Pe’er, an expert on theoretical high-energy astrophysics, was not speaking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His lecture was on black holes.

Rather than stop the disruption, citing the protesters’ 1st Amendment rights, UNLV police escorted Pe’er off campus “to ensure his safety.”

Other cancellations in the name of safety have taken place across the country, from Indiana University shutting down an art exhibit by Palestinian artist Samia Halaby to the University of Vermont canceling an in-person appearance by a pro-Palestinian poet .

Experts who track campus speech say university leaders have predominantly targeted speakers expressing support for the Palestinian cause.

[In this environment of duelling cancellation] “It’s a pressure cooker for administrators,” Morey said. “In these cases, we want to make sure that their lodestar are student and faculty rights, rather than who is exerting the most pressure.”

dzheremi · Apr 18, 2024

No to 'woke', but yes to right-wing 'safe spaces' accomplished via the potential of stochastic terrorism?

Might as well stop pretending to be a university, since apparently being challenged by views other than your own is now not a part of the experience. And to think I used to feel at least slightly sad that I didn't get into a UC school! State universities may not be so glamorous (well...outside of certain UCs), but at least the University of New Mexico didn't force me to pledge ideological allegiance to Israel, or else!

The IbanezerScrooge · Apr 18, 2024

The "Free-Speech Absolutists" will swarm to her defense and pan the university!

Any minute now...

rjs330 · Apr 18, 2024

Do we have an example where the university allowed a student to speak who was opposed to transgenderism? Or was a staunch Christian who proclaimed their faith. How about a student who was an All Lives Matter or was Pro-Israel? Would they have been allowed to speak? Would all you woke supporters support these people's right to give a speech as valedictorian? Were you jumping to the defense of conservative speakers who were banned from campuses?

Let's not pretend that the University is at all interested in free speech and neither are most of you.

By the way I think the student ought to have been allowed to speak. In America we should not be shut down for this kind of thing. Shut down for your personal views? Prevented from speaking for you personal views? I say no, let the student speak.

essentialsaltes · Apr 18, 2024

rjs330 said:
Were you jumping to the defense of conservative speakers who were banned from campuses?

Yes. (Or at least the ACLU jumped in, and I quoted them with approval.)

dzheremi · Apr 18, 2024

rjs330 said:
Do we have an example where the university allowed a student to speak who was opposed to transgenderism?

Is Yale Law School high-profile enough for you? The law professor who moderated that particular event even told protestors to "grow up". Or how about the University of Pittsburgh? Apparently they've had several 'anti-trans' speakers despite heavy protest and backlash over each one. Universities host controversial speakers all the time, in fact. That's why we have the stereotype about students protesting these events: because they keep happening. That doesn't mean that every event is allowed to move forward (the second link mentions Penn State cancelling a speech by Gavin McInnes, for instance), but the idea in the minds of some conservatives that conservative speakers are constantly being cancelled at every 'liberal' university is just a persecution fantasy whereby being protested is in itself a 'cancellation'.

rjs330 said:
Or was a staunch Christian who proclaimed their faith.

When I attended the University of Oregon in very liberal Eugene in 2007-2009, there was one of those street evangelists with a big doom & gloom sign about how God will smite this and that kind of person. This guy showed up every weekday to 'minister' to the students in this way, even though most of the interactions he had were decidedly negative. Even so, he was never made to leave or threatened or anything like that. Just disagreed with and occasionally made fun of, which I have to imagine is to be expected before you decide to live that kind of life.

There is also the existence of hundreds (thousands?) or religiously-affiliated universities of all kinds across the country, of course.

rjs330 said:
How about a student who was an All Lives Matter

I couldn't find a version of it that wasn't marred by one of those appeals to subscribe that takes up most of the screen, but the brief snippet highlighted via Google of this article from the Washington Post suggests that dueling protests from students involved with BLM and anti-BLM/"All Lives Matter" were a thing at Texas A&M back in 2020. I'm sure there have been other events since then, but part of the trouble of searching using the phrase "All Lives Matter" is that you tend to get a lot of results explaining that expression as a conservative response to BLM, but less about its use or popularity among university students.

rjs330 said:
or was Pro-Israel?

There is of course the famous (or at least famous where I'm from, in Northern California) case of Israeli lawyer and IDF reservist Ran Bar-Yoshafat who was invited back to UC Berkeley after his previous speech there disrupted by protestors, where he addressed a welcoming crowd of about 150 people, as reported at the pro-Israel link. That's not exactly something you'd expect to happen if the campus were so anti-Israel that it somehow would not allow him to speak (rather than a segment of the students being so, just as a segment of the students are pro-Israel). This was all just a few months ago.

rjs330 said:
Would they have been allowed to speak?

They clearly have been, so this doesn't actually need to be asked.

rjs330 said:
Would all you woke supporters support these people's right to give a speech as valedictorian?

Are any of them elected valedictorian to begin with? If not, this seems more like pointless rage-bait and grievances over something that's not actually happening, which you'd think would not be necessary if your political tribe were half as oppressed as it claims to be. More of a way to say bad things about "you woke supporters" than anything real.

rjs330 said:
Were you jumping to the defense of conservative speakers who were banned from campuses?

You'd have to find such people to begin with, and then present their cases (e.g., why they were 'banned'; if it was an actual ban, or just people protesting them, etc.) so that they could be evaluated. Speaking personally, I'm not going to give any kind of blanket support to anyone until I know what that means with regard to their stances on issues that I care about. I'm not a "free speech absolutist", though I do think that anyone who can explain and defend their position in a serious way (i.e., not "owning the libs with facts and logic!") ought to be a welcome voice in the public discourse anywhere, given how little of that we see from those with the largest microphones.

rjs330 said:
Let's not pretend that the University is at all interested in free speech and neither are most of you.

And you know this because you've surveyed most of CFs' thousands of users on these issues, I take it?

rjs330 said:
By the way I think the student ought to have been allowed to speak. In America we should not be shut down for this kind of thing. Shut down for your personal views? Prevented from speaking for you personal views? I say no, let the student speak.

How stunning and brave of you to say this after revealing your amazing mind-reading powers in the sentence right before this one.

durangodawood · Apr 18, 2024

rjs330 said:
Were you jumping to the defense of conservative speakers who were banned from campuses?

Not sure if Dinesh DSouza counts. If he wasnt allowed to speak then I wouldn't be able to talk over and over about how I trounced him in a public post-lecture discussion we had.

I think they should let people speak. I do have limits tho. I'm not a free speech absolutist.

DaisyDay · Apr 18, 2024

rjs330 said:
Do we have an example where the university allowed a student to speak who was opposed to transgenderism? Or was a staunch Christian who proclaimed their faith. How about a student who was an All Lives Matter or was Pro-Israel? Would they have been allowed to speak? Would all you woke supporters support these people's right to give a speech as valedictorian? Were you jumping to the defense of conservative speakers who were banned from campuses?

Let's not pretend that the University is at all interested in free speech and neither are most of you.

By the way I think the student ought to have been allowed to speak. In America we should not be shut down for this kind of thing. Shut down for your personal views? Prevented from speaking for you personal views? I say no, let the student speak.

She was not censored for the content of her speech but for who she is. I dunno but the minor she’s criticized for, genocide mitigation “, seems like a good thing.

rjs330 · Apr 19, 2024

essentialsaltes said:
Yes. (Or at least the ACLU jumped in, and I quoted them with approval.)

You had to wait until the ACLU jumped in?

rjs330 · Apr 19, 2024

dzheremi said:
Is Yale Law School high-profile enough for you? The law professor who moderated that particular event even told protestors to "grow up". Or how about the University of Pittsburgh? Apparently they've had several 'anti-trans' speakers despite heavy protest and backlash over each one. Universities host controversial speakers all the time, in fact. That's why we have the stereotype about students protesting these events: because they keep happening. That doesn't mean that every event is allowed to move forward (the second link mentions Penn State cancelling a speech by Gavin McInnes, for instance), but the idea in the minds of some conservatives that conservative speakers are constantly being cancelled at every 'liberal' university is just a persecution fantasy whereby being protested is in itself a 'cancellation'.

When I attended the University of Oregon in very liberal Eugene in 2007-2009, there was one of those street evangelists with a big doom & gloom sign about how God will smite this and that kind of person. This guy showed up every weekday to 'minister' to the students in this way, even though most of the interactions he had were decidedly negative. Even so, he was never made to leave or threatened or anything like that. Just disagreed with and occasionally made fun of, which I have to imagine is to be expected before you decide to live that kind of life.

There is also the existence of hundreds (thousands?) or religiously-affiliated universities of all kinds across the country, of course.

I couldn't find a version of it that wasn't marred by one of those appeals to subscribe that takes up most of the screen, but the brief snippet highlighted via Google of this article from the Washington Post suggests that dueling protests from students involved with BLM and anti-BLM/"All Lives Matter" were a thing at Texas A&M back in 2020. I'm sure there have been other events since then, but part of the trouble of searching using the phrase "All Lives Matter" is that you tend to get a lot of results explaining that expression as a conservative response to BLM, but less about its use or popularity among university students.

There is of course the famous (or at least famous where I'm from, in Northern California) case of Israeli lawyer and IDF reservist Ran Bar-Yoshafat who was invited back to UC Berkeley after his previous speech there disrupted by protestors, where he addressed a welcoming crowd of about 150 people, as reported at the pro-Israel link. That's not exactly something you'd expect to happen if the campus were so anti-Israel that it somehow would not allow him to speak (rather than a segment of the students being so, just as a segment of the students are pro-Israel). This was all just a few months ago.

They clearly have been, so this doesn't actually need to be asked.

Are any of them elected valedictorian to begin with? If not, this seems more like pointless rage-bait and grievances over something that's not actually happening, which you'd think would not be necessary if your political tribe were half as oppressed as it claims to be. More of a way to say bad things about "you woke supporters" than anything real.

You'd have to find such people to begin with, and then present their cases (e.g., why they were 'banned'; if it was an actual ban, or just people protesting them, etc.) so that they could be evaluated. Speaking personally, I'm not going to give any kind of blanket support to anyone until I know what that means with regard to their stances on issues that I care about. I'm not a "free speech absolutist", though I do think that anyone who can explain and defend their position in a serious way (i.e., not "owning the libs with facts and logic!") ought to be a welcome voice in the public discourse anywhere, given how little of that we see from those with the largest microphones.

And you know this because you've surveyed most of CFs' thousands of users on these issues, I take it?

How stunning and brave of you to say this after revealing your amazing mind-reading powers in the sentence right before this one.

I noticed you didn't have an example of the University having someone opposed to transgenderism speak.

To be clear I never claimed that no University anywhere I the US ever allowed any conservative speakers to come. That would be a silly thing to claim.

It's a little rough to give a much credit with leftist speakers at university when the universities invite leftist commencement speakers over conservative ones at a rate of 12-1.

dzheremi said:
a "free speech absolutist", though I do think that anyone who can explain and defend their position in a serious way (i.e., not "owning the libs with facts and logic!") ought to be a welcome voice in the public discourse anywhere,

How magnanimous.

Of course you would poo poo facts and logic. Those two ideals are often lacking among leftists have been replaced with emotions and feelings.

dzheremi · Apr 19, 2024

rjs330 said:
I noticed you didn't have an example of the University having someone opposed to transgenderism speak.

What are you talking about? Did you not click the links? In case you didn't, the first one is reporting on when Yale Law School had an anti-LGBT speaker from the Alliance Defending Freedom speak on their campus, after being invited there by the Federalist Society. The second one is about multiple 'anti-trans' speakers who have spoken recently at the University of Pittsburgh.

Please actually engage with the content of the posts you're responding to before writing your replies. I don't go out of my way to present you with exactly what you've asked for only for you to turn around and pretend that it's not there.

rjs330 said:
It's a little rough to give a much credit with leftist speakers at university when the universities invite leftist commencement speakers over conservative ones at a rate of 12-1.

I'm not asking you or anyone to give universities credit for anything, only presenting one view of what actually happens at universities, over and against the hysteria manufactured by largely right-wing media outlets that is far out of proportion relative to what happens at them when speakers are invited to talk about controversial issues. Most students, just like most administrators and faculty, want there to be space for people with differing views to speak freely. That's one of the major draws of going to college in the first place, outside of pursuing a degree. That's why the street preacher guy with the big "God's going to smite you" sign wasn't kicked off of campus at UO when I was there, and why every campus I've ever been to has college clubs for every type of political and religious alignment you can imagine. That groups of, e.g., anti-Israel protestors at UC Berkeley and similar stereotypically left-wing locations generate a lot of media coverage tends to obscure the fact that those same universities also have explicitly pro-Israel clubs and associations, and that the two factions show up at roughly equal rates when a controversial speaker comes to discuss their viewpoints on Israel-Palestine (e.g., as covered in the jweekly.com link shared previously, there was only about a 50-student difference in the size of the anti-Israel and pro-Israel crowds who showed up at Bar-Yoshafat's two speeches).

rjs330 said:
Of course you would poo poo facts and logic. Those two ideals are often lacking among leftists have been replaced with emotions and feelings.

Again, what are you talking about? This seems to be general projecting rather than discussing any individual point, as I'm not the one ignoring linked news reports in favor of maintaining a fantasy of the university as a leftist ideological death-camp where "facts and logic" are banished just because some students have the temerity to disagree with my own opinions on issues. Not everywhere is the Evergreen State College (a true hippie death camp if I've ever seen one), and most places have space for everyone, even though obviously not every individual stance is going to be equally popular at every location.

ThatRobGuy · Apr 19, 2024

Doesn't sound like she really had her speech nailed down yet, so it sounds like this was less about the commencement speech, and more about whatever was behind that link on her Instagram page.

Per the LA Times article:
The group said Tabassum’s Instagram bio linked to a page that called Zionism a “racist settler-colonial ideology.”

...and the administration also cited safety concerns given that it's the middle of a period of "intense strife" between the two ideological factions.

So it does stand to reason that the school would have some safety concerns with having either an anti-Israel activist or an anti-Palestinian activist, even if the subject matter isn't brought up.

Now, the free speech "absolutists" would say that both should be allowed to speak, and likely envision something like when Brown University hosted a public conversation/debate between the head of the National of Islam and the head of the American Nazi Party (George Lincoln Rockwell). But that was back during a time when people could hear an idea they didn't agree with, respond using only their words, and didn't react by throwing a brick or lighting a dumpster on fire.

The IbanezerScrooge said:
The "Free-Speech Absolutists" will swarm to her defense and pan the university!

Any minute now...

After progressive groups have been giving the self-proclaimed free speech absolutists nothing but snark and derision for the last 3 years, it's a bit of a disingenuous request to expect them to come rushing to the aid of the people who have been insulting them.

...it's something I've called the "Rush Limbaugh effect"...

For those who remember - Rush Limbaugh used to bash drug users, said drug users were scum who should be locked away forever, and voted for "tough on drugs" candidates/policies and encouraged his followers to do the same.

He ended up being caught purchasing and using drugs illegally.

Would it have been reasonable to have expected drug legalization/reform activists to come swarming to his defense when he got busted? (and then call into question their bona fides when they predictably don't?)

Or would it be completely understandable that the legalization/reform advocates held the position of "Sorry Rush,... you get what you vote for, and deserve to get it good and hard...reap what you sow"

essentialsaltes · Apr 19, 2024

rjs330 said:
You had to wait until the ACLU jumped in?

No, that's just the first relevant post I could find through search. The accusatory tone of your far-off-the-mark post didn't inspire further effort on my part.

rjs330 · Apr 19, 2024

dzheremi said:
What are you talking about? Did you not click the links? In case you didn't, the first one is reporting on when Yale Law School had an anti-LGBT speaker from the Alliance Defending Freedom speak on their campus, after being invited there by the Federalist Society. The second one is about multiple 'anti-trans' speakers who have spoken recently at the University of Pittsburgh.

Please actually engage with the content of the posts you're responding to before writing your replies. I don't go out of my way to present you with exactly what you've asked for only for you to turn around and pretend that it's not there.

I'm not asking you or anyone to give universities credit for anything, only presenting one view of what actually happens at universities, over and against the hysteria manufactured by largely right-wing media outlets that is far out of proportion relative to what happens at them when speakers are invited to talk about controversial issues. Most students, just like most administrators and faculty, want there to be space for people with differing views to speak freely. That's one of the major draws of going to college in the first place, outside of pursuing a degree. That's why the street preacher guy with the big "God's going to smite you" sign wasn't kicked off of campus at UO when I was there, and why every campus I've ever been to has college clubs for every type of political and religious alignment you can imagine. That groups of, e.g., anti-Israel protestors at UC Berkeley and similar stereotypically left-wing locations generate a lot of media coverage tends to obscure the fact that those same universities also have explicitly pro-Israel clubs and associations, and that the two factions show up at roughly equal rates when a controversial speaker comes to discuss their viewpoints on Israel-Palestine (e.g., as covered in the jweekly.com link shared previously, there was only about a 50-student difference in the size of the anti-Israel and pro-Israel crowds who showed up at Bar-Yoshafat's two speeches).

Again, what are you talking about? This seems to be general projecting rather than discussing any individual point, as I'm not the one ignoring linked news reports in favor of maintaining a fantasy of the university as a leftist ideological death-camp where "facts and logic" are banished just because some students have the temerity to disagree with my own opinions on issues. Not everywhere is the Evergreen State College (a true hippie death camp if I've ever seen one), and most places have space for everyone, even though obviously not every individual stance is going to be equally popular at every location.

I'm case you weren't aware Yale isn't USC.

rjs330 · Apr 19, 2024

dzheremi said:
Again, what are you talking about? This seems to be general projecting rather than discussing any individual point, as I'm not the one ignoring linked news reports in favor of maintaining a fantasy of the university as a leftist ideological death-camp where "facts and logic" are banished just because some students have the temerity to disagree with my own opinions on issues. Not everywhere is the Evergreen State College (a true hippie death camp if I've ever seen one), and most places have space for everyone, even though obviously not every individual stance is going to be equally popular at every location.

No not everywhere is an ideological death camp as you say. But it's undeniable that universities are left leaning. Research has shown that conservative students receive more pushback from their professors than left leaning ones. They have a higher percentage of silencing themselves out of concerns for backlash. They also receive lower grades from their leftist professors. It is undeniable that leftist college administrators out number conservative ones 12-1 and leftist professors outnumber conservative ones by a good size margin.

In many areas the left relies on feelings and emotions rather than facts and logic. Now of course that doesn't mean they never use it not does it mean the right never does anything from an emotional standpoint either. So calm down before you prove my point but your own response.

Liberals are more emotion-driven than conservatives

Liberals have higher levels of depression and studies are clear they are more emotionally driven. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. It's just a thing. We conservatives are less emotion driven and thus leas empathetic. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. It's just a thing. I kind of think it's good that we have both kinds of people. We need to balance each other out.

Research shows that the liberal and conservative are primarily driven by their brain. Right brain vs left brain. We see that on these boards. There are some very interesting dichotomies in each of the brains though.

essentialsaltes · Apr 19, 2024

rjs330 said:
They also receive lower grades from their leftist professors.

In many areas the left relies on feelings and emotions rather than facts and logic.

Facts like these?

Calculating faculty bias against conservative students

Ideology has only a tiny relationship to college grades, researchers say

But is there any actual evidence that conservative students are penalized by liberal faculty in their classes?

One team of researchers studied more than 7,000 students around the nation who started college in 2009 and found the answer: not so much. They calculated that the most conservative students earned grades that were less than a tenth of a grade point [0.04 if I'm reading the table correctly] lower than those of the most liberal students on a conventional four-point scale.

[The paper also discusses other possible causes for this small difference than conscious bias on the part of professors, which seems unlikely in most cases. For instance, there is also a difference in SAT scores, with conservatives doing better in math, and liberals doing better in english and writing, which may have an effect, particularly in non-STEM classes/majors.]

essentialsaltes · Apr 20, 2024

USC cancels appearance by director Jon Chu, others amid valedictorian controversy

[No one other than university officials will be speaking at commencement. No students, no guests.]

In a letter posted on its website, the university wrote that “given the highly publicized circumstances surrounding our main-stage commencement program,” it made the decision to “release our outside speakers and honorees from attending this year’s ceremony.”

Along with Chu, tennis legend Billie Jean King, National Endowment for the Arts Chair Maria Rosario Jackson and National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt were set to receive honorary degrees.

[I wonder if some of the speakers had already released themselves from their desire to speak.]

Representatives for Chu and King did not respond to requests for comment. Jackson did not reply to a phone call and text message. McNutt did not reply to an email. [King will still be speaking at the Annenberg School event.]

USC valedictorian’s grad speech is canceled: ‘The university has betrayed me’

Stranger in a Strange Land

Stranger in a Strange Land

Did USC set ‘very bad precedent’ by cancelling valedictorian speech over safety threats?​

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

I can't believe what I'm hearing...

Well-Known Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Dis Member

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Part of the IT crowd

Stranger in a Strange Land

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

Calculating faculty bias against conservative students​

Stranger in a Strange Land

USC cancels appearance by director Jon Chu, others amid valedictorian controversy​

Similar threads

Did USC set ‘very bad precedent’ by cancelling valedictorian speech over safety threats?

Calculating faculty bias against conservative students

USC cancels appearance by director Jon Chu, others amid valedictorian controversy