• Molly Callahan

    Senior Writer

    Photo: Headshot of Molly Callahan. A white woman with short, curly brown hair, wearing glasses and a blue sweater, smiles and poses in front of a dark grey backdrop.

    Molly Callahan began her career at a small, family-owned newspaper where the newsroom housed computers that used floppy disks. Since then, her work has been picked up by the Associated Press and recognized by the Connecticut chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists. In 2016, she moved into a communications role at Northeastern University as part of its News@Northeastern reporting team. When she's not writing, Molly can be found rock climbing, biking around the city, or hanging out with her fiancée, Morgan, and their cat, Junie B. Jones. Profile

  • Dave Green

    Dave Green Profile

  • Alan Wong

    Executive Producer

    Alan Wong oversees a team of video producers who create video content for BU's online editorial publications and social media channels. He has produced more than 300 videos for Boston University, shuffling through a number of countries in the process: Australia, Argentina, Peru, Ireland, China, and Cambodia. He has also bored audiences in Atlanta and Boston giving talks on video for higher ed. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There is 1 comment on BU President Emphasizes Open, Respectful Dialogue, Praises Community for “Preserving a Civil and Intellectually Rich Environment”

  1. UCLA Neuroscientist Matt Lieberman recently wrote, “In a 50-50 society no institution can claim to the arbiter of truth when they shut out 70% of the population based on their beliefs.”

    Lieberman, of course, is correct and his words underscore the importance of maintaining a healthy culture of free speech and thought diversity on U.S. college campuses. We’ve experienced a significant regression at Boston University during the last four years, but I’m hopeful that the inauguration of a new president and provost will be the beginning of a much-needed course correction.

    I’ve been engaged in an ongoing conversation with COM Dean Mariette DiChristina and other colleagues about these concerns—an increasing lack of ideological diversity, groupthink and its enforcement mechanisms including DEI statements, the embrace of mis/disinformation studies as a novel social science, and fraught sensibilities in the classroom that put students and instructors on eggshells and compel many of us to self-censor perfectly mainstream perspectives​.

    This is the polar opposite of my experience as a graduate student at BU 25 years ago—a time when my worldview was challenged and broadened in important ways through respectful discussion and debate with classmates from different states, countries, cultures, and life experiences. This was during and in the immediate aftermath of 9/11/01 when many of us were grappling for the first time with the central conflict between globalism and tribalism.

    I applaud Dr. Gilliam for introducing these initial steps to support civil and diverse discourse on campus. This should always be central to our mission and the touchstone of a vigorous academic community. I dislike the bureaucratic style of the memo, though. I’d prefer one simple sentence: “Look friends, we need to allow all sides to be heard without fear of repercussion.”

    I’ve read many profiles about Dr. Gilliam since she was named president, but I’ve yet to see any mention of her earlier administrative experiences upholding free speech via the Chicago Principles—guidelines created and adopted during her time at the University of Chicago to protect and uphold speech and expression on U.S. campuses. This was a built out of institutional neutrality policies piloted at UChi via the Kalven Report (1967).

    Institutional neutrality has spared UChi some of the disruption that’s roiled many other campuses during the past year. Northwestern, Harvard, UNC, Purdue, and (again, notably to Gilliam) OSU have adopted neutrality or are moving toward it. Stanford, Penn, Barnard, UCLA, UW-Madison, UVA, Williams, and Washington State all announced policies of institutional neutrality last week.

    A singular administrator, no matter who they are, should ever speak on behalf of an academic institution about divisive political and social issues. When they do, it almost always stirs up resentment and activism from those who think it’s too much and those who think it’s not enough. President Brown experienced this after putting out a statement in the wake of George Floyd’s officer involved death that many thought was insufficiently forceful. Brown put out a second statement several days later, a reactive redo, and moved with great speed to hire Dr. Kendi and establish the Center for Antiracist Research.

    Dean DiChristina also experienced the unintended fallout of commentary outside of her official purview with her statement after the Oct. 7th terror attacks. I was working with many students at the time who had family and faith connections to the region. Some even held leadership roles on advocacy groups at BU representing each side of the conflict. Although I generally agreed with DiChristina’s message and its contrast to hedging statements made by presidents and deans at other universities, it stirred up more anger and division among students than it solved. I encouraged several students to meet with the dean and share their perspective in a constructive way. At least one student did, and to DiChristina’s great credit, she welcomed the meeting and discussed ways that she might better react to similar events in the future.

    Unsolicited statements from top administrators also have a way of chilling speech among faculty and staff who have conventional or unconventional opinions about issues and events. Dr. Brown’s statement via email blast in June 2023 condemning the SCOTUS ruling in the Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College case was a particularly egregious example. Polling continues to indicate that the decision is broadly popular among Americans of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. Dr. Gilliam’s quote last Friday in BU Today categorizing the ruling as “deeply concerning” suggests BU may not be on a similar path to institutional neutrality as other universities.

    I hope Dr. Gilliam will find a forum to speak about her earlier administrative experiences working with the Chicago Principles and Kalven, and explain if and how she carries these ideals to her presidency at BU.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *