LAST WEEK, the University unveiled a system for members of the community to report bias incidents via the Web or a list of designated administrators. In light of the recent history of threats, harassment and even assaults directed against students on the basis of race and sexual orientation, the "Just Report It" initiative can be a valuable tool for vindicating students' rights. At the same time, like any other centralized reporting system, the database has the potential to threaten civil liberties unless the University implements safeguards against abuse.
Civil libertarians get nervous whenever governments or large institutions set up ongoing monitoring systems. This is not because they are opposed to the general goals of those programs, but because of the double-edged nature of their methods.
For example, the Pentagon's Threat and Local Observation Notice program is valuable in thwarting terrorism. At the same time, it has also threatened our rights by monitoring dozens of peaceful anti-war groups.
In the same vein, the FBI plays an important role in fighting crime. But in the past, the agency also has spied on civil rights leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Taken to the extreme, centralized monitoring can resemble the East German Stasi secret police, which built up voluminous files on almost everyone in the country based on citizen reports.
People of good faith can agree that bias crimes must be zealously prosecuted and bigotry condemned, but also acknowledge that the "Just Report It" program raises some concerns. As an initial matter, the definition of "bias" is inherently standardless, and the University program intentionally has left it so. According to Susan Davis, special assistant to the vice president for student affairs, this is to encourage students to report as many incidents as they can.
"We want to get [all reports] into the system so that we can evaluate [them]," regardless of whether they violate the law or University disciplinary policies, Davis said in an interview.
In a pluralistic society where individuals have diverging values and worldviews, it may be impossible to even address bias objectively. While we can all agree that racially motivated assault, battery and vandalism are morally wrong and punishable, other cases are less clear-cut. What about a University administrator who restricts a discussion group to students of one race because he believes this serves a pedagogical purpose? What about racially exclusive scholarships affiliated with the University?What about race-based student groups, many members of which candidly confess that they prefer not to associate with students of other races?
These are not merely hypothetical, but rather pressing concerns at the University. One can sincerely claim that these are incidents of bias to the students who are excluded because of their race. However, given that these issues are fraught with politics and ideology, the question remains: Should these incidents be reported, and will they be treated seriously? Or will administrators contend that all bias is bad, but some bias is worse than others?
The "Just Report It" Web site emphasizes that the program itself "carries no independent sanctioning weight or authority." Thus, arguing over what incidents of "bias" are actionable may seem like a matter of splitting hairs. Still, when asked what would be done about debatable incidents, Davis suggested, "We will evaluate whether it makes sense for the dean to have an educational conversation with the student" who is the subject of the report.
However, one might wonder whether such conversations are truly voluntary or conducted in lieu of punishment. If it is the latter, then the definition of "bias" must be clarified, lest students be arbitrarily called into the dean's office on the basis of anonymous reports (as the program allows) for all sorts of incidents, whether legitimate or bogus, whether reported sincerely or in bad faith. Left unchecked, the system could escalate out of control and become the basis of an inquisition. To paraphrase Joe McCarthy, "Are you now or have you ever been a bigot?"
It is unquestionable and unfortunate that deplorable acts of intolerance are perpetrated at the University. Those acts that violate other students' rights and materially interfere with their education must be severely punished. To that end, the "Just Report It" program can be invaluable, and I sincerely hope that any fears about civil liberties are overwrought, as they often are. However, to be on the safe side, the University should just be careful with it.
Eric Wang's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at ewang@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 2 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
