MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Melissa Click Is the Scowling Face of Campus Repression, But Shouldn’t Be Fired

She should be educated, not disciplined.

I recently named Mizzou communications professor Melissa Click the #1 most loathsome campus censor of 2015. Click, who until recently held an honorary position in the schools’ journalism school, tried to physically prevent a student-journalist from covering the protests on campus.

Now Missouri Republicans have called on the university to fire Click. According to The Columbia Missourian:

Eighteen Republican senators signed the letter demanding UM dismiss Basler and Click. …

Republican Reps. Caleb Jones, Caleb Rowden and Chuck Basye, all of Boone County, were among those who signed the House letter. Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, signed the Senate letter.

“At every turn, Click’s actions were unacceptable and inflammatory in a situation where the students and the public needed and expected university employees to serve professionally and as a calming influence,” Jones said in a statement accompanying the letter.

"In my opinion, it's clear she violated this reporter's constitutional rights," Jones added in an interview Monday afternoon. "It's also clear that she assaulted that reporter. The state's land grant institution should not be employing people like that." 

I understand where these calls are coming from, but if it were up to me, I would not end Click’s employment with the university. While her transgressions were grave—from a free speech standpoint—they were not gravely criminal. Her victim was not physically harmed. And though Click’s behavior was inappropriate, firing her for mere inappropriate behavior might actually send the wrong message about free expression: namely, that people who act out imperfectly can and should be subject to discipline.

What’s more, Click is clearly a person in need of some educating about the role of the press in a free society. A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson.

Photo Credit: Youtube

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Lord Rollingpin||

    'What’s more, Click is clearly a person in need of some educating about the role of the press in a free society. A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson.'

    Citation needed.

  • R C Dean||

    A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson.'

    Why can't this lesson be learned just as well, if not better, off-campus? Like, say, at an actual media outlet?

  • ||

    Why doesn't anyone have to 'learn' it? An educator should be naturally endowed with it.

    But I'm just an old-school phooey. Worse, an extreme white guy.

  • RBS||

    an extreme white guy.

    Powder?

  • ||

    Flour.

  • Free Market Socialist $park¥||

    So you don't need to worry about a lightning bolt exploding you into an EMP of love. That's probably a relief.

  • ||

    Zinc oxide.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    Yeah, where the hell did that come from?

    And though Click’s behavior was inappropriate, firing her for mere inappropriate behavior might actually send the wrong message about free expression: namely, that people who act out imperfectly can and should be subject to discipline.

    You mean like in the real world? Where you can and will be fired for failing to live up to the expectations of your employer?

    Fire her. Set an example, ffs.

  • WTF||

    Click wasn't engaging in free expression, she was attempting to use force to stifle media coverage.

  • ||

    She should serve as a teaching point to other education fascists.

    Head on a pike.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Woodchopper! Get with the program!

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    She deserves a prize for that.

    What should we call it?

    The Richard M. Nixon Memorial Prize for Cover Ups?

  • lap83||

    Yeah, I'm not sure what free expression has to do with being gainfully employed. I think Robby's youth and naivete is showing.

  • albo||

    She ain't gonna learn shit. Her ossified mind will not be changed.

  • Mickey Rat||

    She is a communications professor. How many people is she going to teach on that subject before she learns?

  • ||

    "A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson.'"

    The campus is where she learned how to call for 'some muscle over here'.

  • wFt||

    She is/was supposed to be a professor in the school of journalism, and imparting knowledge to students of that erstwhile subject. As such I am inclined to go with termination.

  • WTF||

    She has clearly demonstrated she is unfit for the job.

  • Curt||

    It seems pretty clear that she isn't going to learn shit. There are those who agree with her and those who don't. Why on earth would she "learn" something from the idiots who don't agree with her on such obvious matters.

  • Charlotte Falcon||

    She needs therapy. My proof: her picture.

  • R C Dean||

    While her transgressions were grave—from a free speech standpoint—they were not gravely criminal.

    I'm pretty sure she committed an actual, intentional, assault. Is that only a firing offense if somebody gets hurt?

    I don't think anyone is saying she should be fired for "inappropriate" behavior. I think they are saying she should be fired for "criminal" behavior.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Did she actually physically harm someone, or is this the litigious version of 'assault' where someone acting like a big meany causes a terminal case of cryabetes?

  • R C Dean||

    She didn't physically harm someone, but you can commit a criminal assault without inflicting damage. Generally, its a misdemeanor (there is a lot of variation among states) without some degree of damage, but not always.

    Assault hasn't required physical damage for centuries, so this isn't some new thing, either.

    This looks like third degree assault under Missouri law, which is a misdemeanor:

    Knowingly causing physical contact with another person knowing it will be considered offensive by the other person,

    http://www.assaultandbattery.org/missouri/

    I know of very few private sector employers who won't fire someone, especially a professional, who commits assault. Not sure why standards always have to be lower in the public sector and academia.

  • Hugh Akston||

    So the crybaby version. Gotcha.

  • R C Dean||

    How much damage before you would say an assault should actually be illegal, Hugh? Broken fingernail? Crushed orbit? Somewhere in between?

  • Hugh Akston||

    The third one. I certainly don't think pushing someone out of the way qualifies as harm.

  • R C Dean||

    OK. Broken bones not required. Blood, yes or no?

  • RBS||

    pushing someone out

    That's a battery anyway...

    /1L RBS

  • ||

    We need some muscle over here...

    Hugh, just think of how that could have turned out had the bystanders responding to her commands been more aggressive. By assuming a leadership role she assumes more responsibility. Sorry your notions of what is and isn't crybabyism don't comport with the last several hundred years of common law; but that's a you problem, not an us problem.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Look dude, if I had access to counterfactual realities, I would score the seven season blu-ray set of Firefly, not waste my time observing mindless automatons responding helplessly to commands issued by frail academics.

    In this timeline, she maybe touched some dude and a bunch of people are throwing tantrums about it because they don't like her politics.

  • R C Dean||

    So, if she drew blood, she should be fired, but not unless she drew blood?

    How much blood? Like, a paper cut, or do we need a severed artery?

  • Hugh Akston||

    That's an excellent John impression RC.

  • R C Dean||

    Well, since you are arguing it should only be assault if damage is inflicted, I'm trying to figure out how much damage.

    You're not giving me much to go on. Which may be a clue as to why we haven't required damage for centuries.

  • Hugh Akston||

    It certainly couldn't have anything to do with the damage payouts that are extracted through civil suits, or the hours that lawyers bill for.

  • R C Dean||

    We're talking criminal, not civil, law here, Hugh.

  • Hugh Akston||

    So criminal lawyers all work pro bono? Mighty generous of them. I'm sure the cops, judges, and jailers all work on a volunteer basis too, so nobody profits from criminalizing harmless actions.

  • ||

    The goalposts were just fine where they were, Hugh.

  • Raven Nation||

    If I pushed a student in a classroom, my job would be at risk, tenure or not.

  • Adam330||

    Are you really arguing that an employer isn't justified in firing an employee (the professor) that physically shoves a customer (the student) unless the customer actually gets hurt?

  • Swiss Servator||

    So you have no problem with people spitting in someone's face, putting their hands in your face or around your neck, etc - as long as you aren't "hurt"?

  • Hugh Akston||

    There's a distinction between being okay with something and not thinking that thing should be illegal.

  • WTF||

    So, initiating force on someone without just cause is okay in your book as long as they don't suffer whatever your definition is of "hurt"?

  • Hugh Akston||

    I think if you're going to be able to file charges that could potentially land someone in prison, you should be able to prove actual harm. I can see how that makes me a terrible libertarian.

  • WTF||

    So, your answer is yes, then? And accepting violations of the NAP so long as they are not in your mind too big does make you kind of a bad libertarian.

  • Ceci n'est pas un woodchipper||

    I mean, kinda. From a NAP perspective, if we're gonna go that route, I'd say everything she did counts as aggression. If you believe in law at all, I would say that in the absolutely most minimal sense the law is supposed to exist in order to dissuade this sort of behavior and offer an orderly, reasonably peaceful method of obtaining redress and punishing the aggressor.

  • Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair||

    Why do you think the phrase "assault and battery" exists, if assault equals battery? They are different.

    You need some legal education.

  • Bubba Jones||

    I think battery is the actual hitting part.

  • kinnath||

    The woman belongs in a cell awaiting trial. Losing her job is a typical consequence of breaking the law while performing your job.

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    "What’s more, Click is clearly a person in need of some educating about the role of the press in a free society. A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson."

    So a re-education... campus then?

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    "What’s more, Click is clearly a person in need of some educating about the role of the press in a free society. A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson."

    So a re-education... campus then?

  • See Double You||

    Meh, I don't think Ms. Click lacks the necessary education. Some people choose to be authoritarian assholes.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    As a staff member at Missouri, she violated journalists First Amendment rights, and she did it on camera. By calling for muscle, she was inciting actual violence. WTF?

  • Eternal Blue Sky||

    Yeah, pretty sure her rights to speech ended when she tried to incite forcibly removing someone from a public area...

  • kbolino||

    At every turn, Click’s actions were unacceptable and inflammatory in a situation where the students and the public needed and expected university employees to serve professionally and as a calming influence

    Now, cops on the other hand, ...

  • BearOdinson||

    She isn't a 19 yo sophomore she is a communications professor. She is one of the ones who should be teaching about free speech. FFS, if she doesn't understand free speech by now, what makes you think by being kept on at the University, she will ever learn?
    And it may be true that her victim was not harmed. But that doesn't change the fact that she engaged in criminal behavior.
    I am not saying that we should run every leftist professor out of academia (even if we could). But this goes beyond a person's "point of view". What she did was COMPLETELY inappropriate for a faculty member, never mind a communications dept faculty member.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    And though Click’s behavior was inappropriate, firing her for mere inappropriate behavior might actually send the wrong message about free expression: namely, that people who act out imperfectly can and should be subject to discipline.

    Horse ca-ca. Click, the embryonic Brownshirt, deserves to be stripped naked and frog-marched into the town square to be pelted with rotten fruit before being led up to the gallows.

  • ||

    Embryonic?

  • R C Dean||

    Even I'm not willing to say she isn't a real person. That's harsh, HM.

  • wFt||

    Sounds familiar. Did you get that idea from Game of Thrones?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No...from the depths of the red-hot fury makes up the trance-world of the Úlfhéðnar .

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    Damn. That is one fine word.

    Úlfhéðnar

    It even looks cool.

  • BearOdinson||

    Meh. Úlfhèðnar (wolf-pelt wearers) are cool . But I stick with my fellow Berserkers (BEAR-pelt wearers). Both are special to the Allfather.

  • R C Dean||

    Weren't the berserkers hammered out of their gourds on mushrooms?

  • ||

    What, no video to go along with horse ca-ca?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Anomalous||

    (ding ding ding) Shame. Shame. Shame.

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    Click, the embryonic Brownshirt

    In the US, they were the Silvershirts.

  • Illocust||

    I wouldn't fire her for protesting with the protestors or for calling for black only spaces on campus (despite clear racism inherent in that request). When she physically touches and encourage other students to physically touch another student against their explicit will, though, she's crossed a line from words to actions. She should be fired for her actions not her silly beliefs.

  • ||

    I was going to write that she ordered the students, but upon further consideration "I need some muscle over here" is indeed mere encouragement. Had she said "you, remove that person," or "get him" that would have been giving orders. So she came as close as she possibly could have without giving orders. Much like "god says kill fags" is expressing a belief not actual incitement.

  • Ron||

    however when a person is responsible for your grades a request can be construed as an order.

  • ||

    It wasn't clear if any of the bystanders were actually in her classes, but as an adult faculty member she certainly deserves to be held to a high standard.

  • colorblindkid||

    I highly doubt this woman even has the capability to change her mind or "learn" anything.

  • Lord Rollingpin||

    I'm sure a couple of sessions with Warty would teach here a few things. Of course that 'cruel and unusual' thing might apply here.

  • kbolino||

    Just say it's not meant as punishment, and it's perfectly fine.

    /Antonin Scalia

  • ||

    Yes, LR, even Warty has feelings and I wouldn't wish Ms. Click on him.

  • Free Market Socialist $park¥||

    You got it right, Rico. A college campus is the ideal place for professors to be learning. Especially learning the subjects that they teach. Good call.

    /facepalm

  • wFt||

    Click is/was supposed to be a professor in the school of journalism, and imparting knowledge to students of that erstwhile subject. As such I am inclined to go with termination.

  • Mongo||

    She's a harmless Tough Chyck. Calling her the Scowling Face of Campus Repression is a good enough comeback.

  • ||

    I would not terminate Click’s position at the university...

    OK, terminating her position is different than firing her. When you eliminate a position it's known as a layoff or downsizing, and the position disappears from the org chart and the person holding the position is let go. When you eliminate a position to get rid of a problem employee who you'd rather not fire for liability reasons you generally have to wait a year before you decide you need that position again. Firing is when you say "Click, you're fired, GTFO" and the next day there's someone new in her office.

    I agree that her actions were egregious, inappropriate and criminal and that she, personally, deserves to be fired. Having said that, outright firing of her is dicey and sure to make a martyr. Probably cleaner to eliminate her position which also has the net effect of punishing those supervising her by reducing their importance. Either that or wait for a criminal conviction and use that as a bona fide reason for firing her.

  • Free Market Socialist $park¥||

    I see no reason to hesitate in making her a martyr for an asinine cause.

  • R C Dean||

    Indeed. As a highly unsympathetic person, she would fill the martyr slot ineffectively. Which is a good thing.

  • ||

    And upon reconsideration, I'm inclined to agree with Sparky and RC, but firing her will be difficult without a conviction given the problems with firing any public employee, particularly (tenured?) faculty.

  • Free Market Socialist $park¥||

    Some enterprising person could make an epic YouTube mashup of Ms Click and Jerelyn Luther.

  • R C Dean||

    I don't think she's tenured.

    Most non-tenured faculty have contracts for a fixed term. Perhaps she could be transferred to a job that involved no contact with students or the public until her term expires.

  • ||

    Her faculty bio page says she's an assistant professor; can't remember whether those are tenured. Anyone know? Also, while she's smiling in her picture there, it looks like it's making her face hurt.

  • Raven Nation||

    Assistant professor is normally tenure-track but not yet tenured (if it's a Visiting Asst. Prof then that would not be tenure track but she's not in the category). Looking at her c.v., her tenure clock must be pretty close to running out thought.

  • R C Dean||

    Nicely pedanted, Tonio.

  • ||

    Thanks. That means a lot coming from you. ;-)

  • R C Dean||

    Well, I am busting out my "excellent John impression" in this thread.

  • ||

    Yeah, I wonder who pissed in Hugh's Wheaties this morning?

  • Robby Soave||

    "OK, terminating her position is different than firing her. When you eliminate a position it's known as a layoff or downsizing, and the position disappears from the org chart and the person holding the position is let go."

    Correct, thanks. I'll fix.

  • ||

    NP. I only nit-pick because I enjoy your writing.

  • Swiss Servator||

    Wow...the commentariat united as seldom seen lately...

    *sniffles*

  • Swiss Servator||

    NOTE: Written before Hugh and Mongo RUINED it all!!!!!!!

  • DJF||

    I am betting that if Melissa Click had the power she would put most of the Reason staff in prison or against the wall

  • Adans smith||

    As someone who has been an employer,termination would be my first choice.Your free speech does rights do not trump your employers right to rid themselves of people that bring bad press to their business.Idiots need to be weeded out.

  • Sevo||

    If she hasn't learned by now, she needs to find job more appropriate to her mental abilities. Char-woman comes to mind.

  • DJF||

    Prison guard?

  • Free Market Socialist $park¥||

    I don't think you can intentionally do that to prisoners.

  • MJGreen - Docile Citizen||

    Why not both?

    But seriously, she's an adult that purports to be knowledgeable about journalism. Her immediate, instinctual response to a man trying to perform some journalism was to have him intimidated and possibly assaulted. I don't think that can be educated away. She should consider a different career.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Click, who until recently held an honorary position in the schools’ journalism school

    huh? Someone explain this to me. She's essentially an intellectual carpetbagger?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Her main position was in the communications department, she held what I assume to be an adjunct position in the journalism department in order to "advise graduate [journalism] students on projects and theses."

    Not unusual.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Ah, ok. I thought maybe she was the daughter of some senator who had been given an "honorary title" or something.

  • widget||

    As a business owner with empLoyees would not "fire" someone for being a jerk. I would lay that person off, take the unemployment insurance hit (I'm already graded at F-) and wish them the best of luck.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    It seems to me she demonstrated a gross lack of fundamental comprehension of her "subject matter".

    Terminate her for incompetence. How hard should that be?

  • Raven Nation||

    *shakes head*

    Sorry, LPB, an academic who calls for repression of non-progressive views would be viewed as someone with an excellent understanding of their subject matter in most cases. Sadly.

  • Rasilio||

    "understand where these calls are coming from, but if it were up to me, I would not terminate Click’s position at the university. While her transgressions were grave—from a free speech standpoint—they were not gravely criminal. Her victim was not physically harmed."

    So being fired for grossly inappropriate behavior on the job is now equivalent to criminal prosecution?

    If people were arguing for her to be arrested and charged with some sort of crime I might agree with you but the reality is if I go into the office behave in a manner completely anththetical to the level of professionalism my position requires I am going to get quite deservedly fired and that is what this woman deserves

  • R C Dean||

    If people were arguing for her to be arrested and charged with some sort of crime I might agree with you

    She clearly committed third degree misdemeanor assault. Unless we want to repeal that law, why should she be exempt from being prosecuted for it?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    If the student had been a King County Metro Driver, Click would be guilty of a felony.

  • Je suis Woodchipper||

    no.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I understand where these calls are coming from, but if it were up to me, I would not terminate Click’s position at the university. While her transgressions were grave—from a free speech standpoint—they were not gravely criminal.

    I'm not sure if that's what they're saying. I mean, they do indicate she "assaulted" a reporter-- and given the state's broad definition of assault, that may be true.

    However, it seems there are lots of other reasons to fire her, aside from any perceived criminality. I'm imagining myself acting that way at a corporate event and becoming the face of my company's tolerance for other people. I'm guessing my job wouldn't be long of this world.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    I'm imagining myself acting that way at a corporate event and becoming the face of my company's tolerance for other people. I'm guessing my job wouldn't be long of this world.

    Exactly. Like it or not, you are the face of the organization and, should you embarrass them, you're done.

  • commodious spittoon||

    But academia holds itself above the corporate world as transcending the profit motive and competition and meritocracy and instead embracing inquiry and diversity. They shouldn't be subjected to the cruel indifference of corporate standards.

    Of course, they hold themselves above the corporate world because they're supposed to be champions of free inquiry and actual diversity, which makes their failure to uphold either even more damning.

  • Rhywun||

    Came here to say exactly this. She's making the school a laughingstock.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    if it were up to me, I would not terminate Click’s position at the university.

    Fuck professional courtesy.

    Incompetence is incompetence.

  • Derp-o-Matic 5000||

    Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon... you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do that all the time.

  • Sevo||

    OT, but I just can't pass it up:

    "Obama wiped tears from his cheeks as he spoke emotionally about the victims of gun violence."
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/pol.....pid=brknow

    No, really!

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    So he's gone full Clinton.

  • RBS||

    Come on man, I'm eating.

  • SIV||

    Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Is it just me or does Click really look like Carrot Top in that photo?

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I'm not clicking on that, because as I understand he's... transformed himself with creepy plastic surgery and steroids.

  • RBS||

    Yes, like some bronzed demon.

  • Citizen X||

    It's basically a picture of Warty, if Warty was capable of smiling.

  • BearOdinson||

    Robby,
    I am starting to think you are just trolling us. You don't actually BELIEVE that she should be kept on, do you?

  • ||

    He's still hoping for that honorary masters from Columbia S of J. Don't want to get on the wrong side of school admin until that's done.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    She violated a student's academic freedom.

    Can academic freedom mean anything if university officials are free to violate it with impunity?

    According to the Republicans' letter, she doesn't even have tenure. So the University wouldn't have to worry about the hassles of a full-on tenure-termination trial.

    And there is no shortage of humanities professors who would be happy to get this tenured position, and who *haven't* suppressed students' academic-freedom rights.

    So take her job and give it to a professor who respects, rather than violates, academic freedom.

    Why would this even be controversial?

    She should be able to use her "martyr" status to get another university post elsewhere.

  • ||

    'I need some muscle over here!'

    That's what she said?

  • R C Dean||

    Word for word.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Did any lesbians respond to the request?

  • Mongo||

    Ha! This is what you say to her!

  • commodious spittoon||

    Disagree, and your sentiment is precisely why campuses are a spawning ground for censorious tendencies: when the mob starts baying for blood due to some microscopic transgression, people resign or are fired. When they slip up in a way which is unprofessional and ethically reprehensible, they're let off with a slap on the wrist. This is not a matter of philosophical consistency, it's about holding people to account when they wield their authority irresponsibly.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    If the university does fire her, the progs will be screaming at the top of their lungs about academic freedom. I find that massively funny given their usual attitude toward academic freedom (or any freedom other than gay marriage or getting an abortion).

  • Notorious UGCC||

    And if the progs protest, we will know the university finally did something right.

  • Kevin47||

    "While her transgressions were grave—from a free speech standpoint—they were not gravely criminal."

    So she should not be prosecuted.

    "Her victim was not physically harmed."

    Like she wanted him to be.

    "namely, that people who act out imperfectly can and should be subject to discipline."

    Imperfectly? You just said the offense was grave.

    "A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson."

    Then she should fork over tuition and enroll, not get paid to teach.

  • Old.Mexican||

    Melissa Click Is the Scowling Face of Campus Repression, But Shouldn’t Be Fired


    I am thinking, Robby, that you're simply making a suggestion and not an argument, because the latter would have to be predicated on the notion that a job is a right.

    If she violated school policy, she should be fired from her job. She has no right to that job. Period.

  • Hugh Akston||

    It might also be predicated on the idea that even if she did violate school policy, it wasn't grave enough to merit termination. You know, like what happens with pretty much everybody who violates their employment agreements in minor ways all the time?

  • commodious spittoon||

    Except they should conform to a different set of standards, the standards of academia, not those of the corporate world.

    It's just that actual academic standards would find the incident even more repugnant than a corporate board, which would simply fire the sap and issue an apology. Academia is supposed to champion academic liberty. They should be issuing a vehement censure alongside her pink slip.

  • Hugh Akston||

    So they should demonstrate their commitment to academic liberty by firing someone for expressing the wrong opinion?

  • R C Dean||

    Shoving someone isn't "expressing an opinion", Hugh.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I'm not going to speak with any authority over what policies she violated. And the fact that some Republican politicians are calling for it really means nothing to me. But if the Executive Director of the First Amendment Foundation shoved a student reporter trying to cover a protest and angrily called for their removal, I'd certainly consider the possibility of firing them if I were on the board.

    The journalism profession fancies itself the "guardians of the first amendment". I know her position is honorary and all that, so she may not be hip to these sentiments, but it speaks volumes about her values in regards to the department and its purported goals.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    You must work in Academia, because how else could you be this obtuse. She didn't express an opinion - she pushed someone, and I can't imagine any job I've ever had where I wouldn't be fired for pushing a customer.

  • Old.Mexican||

    Re: Hugh Akston,

    It might also be predicated on the idea that even if she did violate school policy, it wasn't grave enough to merit termination.


    Doesn't that suggest that such determination is based on a subjective value judgment and not an objective one? What does "grave enough" entail, when it comes to current school policy?

    Objectively, if she violated school policy, her actions merit termination as one would have to concede she tacitly agreed to abide by policy since she has agreed to work at the institution. If her actions did not violate school policy, then her actions do not merit termination. In other words, whatever Robby is arguing has to be predicated on his subjective value judgment and not on current school policy and not on any logical argumentation that is valid (since no one has a right to a job) which means he's making a suggestion.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Well since all judgments made by human beings are subjective...yes?

  • Bill Dalasio||

    On the other hand physically shoving customers and calling on them to be physically confronted generally doesn't fall under the rubric of "minor ways" at most companies I've ever been involved with.

  • Free Society||

    It might also be predicated on the idea that even if she did violate school policy, it wasn't grave enough to merit termination. You know, like what happens with pretty much everybody who violates their employment agreements in minor ways all the time?

    So it's a minor violation that a journalism professor would threaten physical violence on student journalists covering a public protest? She should be teaching students about journalism?

    So they should demonstrate their commitment to academic liberty by firing someone for expressing the wrong opinion?

    Threatening someone with physical violence for engaging in lawful journalism in a place where the journalist has a right to be is not expressing an opinion. And how does retaining the employment of a communications professor that did this demonstrate a commitment to academic liberty? What the fuck are you smoking, Hugh?

  • DesigNate||

    Don't mind Hugh, he's gone temporarily retarded.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    What amuses me about that situation is that the student journalist in question (based on an interview I read) was completely on their side, and was there to document their great moral victory. They blew a chance for some positive PR.

  • R C Dean||

    He apparently still doesn't understand that he provided them exactly the great moral victory they craved. I suspect everyone involved is shocked that its not regarded as such out in the big world.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    I'm inclined to agree, to some extent. Still, I can't help but wonder what the consequences of a professor calling on students to physically confront another student ("I need some muscle over here") would be in any other circumstance would be. I can only assume it would be a firing offense.

  • ||

    Try and say that in a bank setting where I worked for 10 years.

  • R C Dean||

    "Goddamit, I am NOT counting all these pennies. I need some muscle over here!"

    Actually, at Wells Fargo, nobody would bat an eye.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    That said, no she shouldn't (actually probably can't) be educated. She's a professor for crying out loud. If she hasn't kind of gotten the value of free speech by now, there's really not much hope. Instead, the proper outcome is for her to be mocked and ridiculed by the university and the community at large to the point that no one takes any of her classes because doing so is seen as a black mark on one's resume. Then, since she's not really serving any customers, she should be terminated.

  • Ron||

    Except that in this case she violated a persons rights and if you aren't going to punish someone for that then why have rights. Is the writer of this article just trying to be politically correct to get pussy or something, fool.

  • Marshal||

    What’s more, Click is clearly a person in need of some educating about the role of the press in a free society.

    Your idea is for us to set up competing indoctrination and intimidation "education" seminars? Good god!

  • Ceci n'est pas un woodchipper||

    She isn't attending the university, she's a paid employee. Her job is to teach, not to be taught.

  • The Grinch||

    An anti first amendment communications professor who physically assaulted a student (and invites another to do so), although she happened to be too much of a wuss to hurt the guy. Fire the scrunt.

  • R C Dean||

    I like it. Fire her for being bad at assault.

    "Jeebus, woman. You're not here to play paddycake with students. You're here to get them in line, no questions asked or answered. You didn't even draw blood. That was just embarrassing. You're fired."

  • buybuydandavis||

    As an employee of the University she was an agent of the state using that position of authority to violate someone's constitutional rights.

    Reason considers that merely inappropriate?

    You pusillanimous pretend friends to freedom.

  • Ken Shultz||

    If Republicans keep lining up to support the Bill of Rights, First Amendment here, Second Amendment there, and progressives keep lining up on the other side, we might really have a libertarian moment developing.

  • Derp-o-Matic 5000||

    Don't get too excited, Ken. Republicans will let us down soon enough.

  • commodious spittoon||

    *checks watch*

    Yeah, it's been about five minutes.

  • Derp-o-Matic 5000||

    Rico, if this were a student or if she'd merely participated in the protests, I'd maybe agree with you, but Click is (1) an adult, (2) an educator, and (3) an agent of the State government. She tried to suppress the First Amendment and called for the assault of students. She should have been fired the day the video was released.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    What if the student pushed back? We all know what would have happened.

  • GILMORE™||

    "She should be educated, not disciplined."

    Discipline IS education. For the benefit of others.

    The woman is a college professor. I doubt her problem has been a shortage of 'education'. Its what she chose to do with her position that was inappropriate.

    I also despise this idea that everyone is supposed to come around to better-behavior if provided the right edumacation. Nonsense. No amount of lecturing is going to change someone's Bad Ideas. Those Bad Ideas exist and are reinforced by social rewards and approval. She believes she was right because everyone around her believed it was right. You can't undo the self-righteousness of a collective by 'informing' individuals.

    Its the same lingo the SJW types use when people refuse to conform to their personal-pronoun demands. ""You needs to Educate Yourself on the politically acceptable ways to treat snowflakes; they don't have to put up with people who dare to treat everyone the same way.""

    I find the idea of mandatory-imposed 'education' (like the "Cultural Awareness"-training many of the BLM activists demand on college) far more disturbing and totalitarian than simple 'consequences' for bad-behavior. People are free to THINK whatever they want. Its when their stupid ideas translate into stupid actions that the Hammer should fall and everyone - not just the one person being punished - realizes that their bad ideas have actual consequences.

  • Derp-o-Matic 5000||

    Discipline IS education. For the benefit of others

    And for herself. If Click ever gets employed at another university, she will know that assaulting students and calling on other students to do the same is frowned upon.

  • R C Dean||

    I find the idea of mandatory-imposed 'education' (like the "Cultural Awareness"-training many of the BLM activists demand on college)

    Yeah, that has much the same stink as the quasi-Maoist "courageous conversations"/self-criticism sessions that was being touted yesterday for cops who murder people.

    When you keep proposing minor variations on stuff the Communists were doing decades ago, it might be time for a rethink.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Rico, this is the sort of thing that makes people think you're wishy washy. The woman absolutely does not belong in a position where she could pass her poisonous illiberal values on to impressionable students, and I'm not entirely convinced that criminal charges aren't warranted -- she clearly and sincerely called other people to do illegal violence; whether or not they actually did was no longer under her control at that point, regardless.

  • Free Society||

    This might actually be the dumbest fucktarded article Robby has ever written in his life. It's probably more fucktarded than the most fucktarded article published at Salon this entire week. I don't see any of the Robby defenders in this thread telling people the leave him alone either, and that tells you something.

  • \\v//||

    Please tender your resignation before you're fired. In any case, it will be easier than receiving the boot. Also, offer up a sincere apology to the young student journalist you bullied and almost had man-handled. You totally acted like a thug lady. Just looking out for you, specially since you're Carrot Top's mom and I think he's interesting...

  • Free Society||

    I understand where these calls are coming from, but if it were up to me, I would not end Click’s employment with the university. While her transgressions were grave—from a free speech standpoint—they were not gravely criminal. Her victim was not physically harmed. And though Click’s behavior was inappropriate, firing her for mere inappropriate behavior might actually send the wrong message about free expression: namely, that people who act out imperfectly can and should be subject to discipline.

    What. Utter. Horse. Shit.

    Why would her actions need to be criminal to warrant her dismissal? And how would firing her send the wrong message about free expression? She intimidated a student journalist by threatening to use physical force to prevent a journalist from covering a public protest!

    What’s more, Click is clearly a person in need of some educating about the role of the press in a free society. A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson.

    What's more she's a fucking professor who is ostensibly teaching others lessons about the role of a free press in society. She's not there to learn, she's there to help others learn and she seems uniquely unqualified for that position.

    Jesus fucking Christ, Robby. Your arguments here so profoundly retarded I don't think any rebuttals can rid the world of all the stupid you've unleashed upon it.

  • R C Dean||

    Why would her actions need to be criminal to warrant her dismissal?

    What's worse is, they were criminal, and Robby admits as much.

    And not victimless-criminal, either. An actual assault.

    To me, its not firing her that sends the wrong message, namely that people who act out by assaulting others and trying to incite mob violence, all in direct contravention of the university's professed values and in a way that draws very public rebukes, should keep their jobs.

  • Free Society||

    Oh no Dean, her behavior was merely inappropriate and we can't fire her because that would be demanding perfection from her.

    Seriously though, I'm not distorting his argument at all, just condensing it down a bit and after reading^ what I just wrote, I just can't believe he made that argument and actually believes it. Robby's thought process astounds me.

  • Derp-o-Matic 5000||

    Rico, everyone disagrees with you on this one.

    F-

    You didn't even have the courtesy to alt-text.

  • lap83||

    A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson.

    Then she can enroll in a class, after she gets fired...which would be a great lesson, btw.

  • electrotectic||

    Soave, I agree with you. I'm not keen on the wolf packs, left or right.

  • R C Dean||

    So you agree that people who act out by assaulting others and trying to incite mob violence, all in direct contravention of the university's professed values and in a way that draws very public rebukes, should keep their jobs.

  • Free Society||

    Maybe Robby saw all the ardent disagreement in this thread and decided to sock puppet some support.

  • toadboy65||

    Except that she has had decades to learn, and only came back with the notion that Western democracy must be dismantled at any cost. And people are working hard to put their kids through college, only to to have people like her get access to their children, so that she can try to fill their minds with such garbage. She should not be around kids.

  • bacon-magic||

    Robbo,
    Use the hair when writing. Otherwise we get craptastic articles like this. Fire the bitch, period.(I always wondered how it'd look if I said period then used a .)

  • block30||

    She absolutely needs to be fired and sent back to reality....you know, away from the ivory extremist tower of academia. She was calling for muscle against student reporters for crying out loud!!

  • macsnafu||

    What, no 're-education" jokes? Clearly, she should be sent to a summer re-education camp for first amendment sensitivity courses!

  • ertdfg||

    Two questions.
    1) Would you agree what she did constitutes assault under the law?
    2) Why not prosecute her for her criminal actions?

    Oh, and a follow up:
    What other crimes do you think "we should give them a job at a university to educate them" is proper "punishment" for violating the law?
    Should we have University jobs for others engaging in criminal activity?
    If not, why not?

  • MarioLanza||

    "A university campus is actually the best place for her to learn that lesson."

    She made a threat against a student and a journalist. "Hey, can I get some muscle over here?"

    The lesson learned - if she is allowed to stay on - is that crimes that are PC are excusable but there are many un-PC's non-crimes that get you fired. E.g, Larry Summers got fired for merely suggesting that males might be better at math. (One can say females are better at activity X, but you can't say males are better at activity Y.)

  • EvilWayz||

    You can't fix stupid. And the very fact that a faculty member called for physical violence to stop a journalist from doing his job proves she doesn't understand the very subject she teaches. SHe should be out on her ass yesterday.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online