Time to talk: is Warwick silencing its students?

[dropcap]F[/dropcap]our out of five UK universities are actively suppressing students’ freedom of expression – according to a recent league table coordinated by online magazine Spiked!. 80 percent of academic institutions have been stamped with either a red or amber rating based on their policies and actions, indicating that the University and Students’ Union have restricted or actively stifled free speech and expression on campus. Among the 88 percent of Russell Group universities accused of forcibly censoring ideas on campus, Warwick has been marked as one of the worst, most muzzling universities and thus received a red status. But how accurate is this branding?

Warwick currently has an injunction which bans occupation-style protests, signaling that perhaps Warwick does restrict the right to freedom of expression. However, it would be unfair to group the politically active and expressive students in the same bracket as this.

Warwick has been named as the number one most influential student voter group in the upcoming general election by the Guardian. Warwick’s political engagement was further demonstrated by the sit-ins and protests in favour of Free Education.

Despite the alleged ferocity of the police, students were not suppressed by the excessive force and organised a peaceful demonstration supported by some members of staff and the SU in response, thus indicating that even when there is an attempt to forcibly smother freedom of expression, it is proven to be ineffective.

Institutional bans which have contributed to the red rating include the banishment of the Sun and the Daily Star from campus shops as part of the No More Page 3 campaign. Campaigns such as this have been carried out democratically and organised by students.

Instead of the University enforcing censorship on the students, as implied by Spiked!, it is the student body which is acknowledging wrongs, in this case sexism and degradation of women, and then deciding to take necessary action.

There is no infringement of liberty by doing this. However, if campus shops were forced to sell a particular newspaper, that would be an infringement of liberty and expression. Students are not limiting free speech, rather exercising their right to it. It is not a case of megalomania or extreme censorship.

Depending on what is being banned or protested against, censorship is not a fear of giving offense, but a correction of wrongs.

The persistence of activism and proposals, such as the “No Confidence in Nigel Thrift” motion which was supported with a 70 percent landslide vote, continues to put pressure on the University to listen to the student’s demands. The fact that it is mainly the students who are proposing policies, petitions and protests in order to oust discrimination and to create a more equal, inclusive campus is an important fact to remember.

On a larger scale, the issue of free speech outstrips Warwick when it was propelled into focus last month after the attack on Charlie Hebdo. The pervading presence of this subject highlights the importance of Warwick students exercising their liberties and speaking out against the supposed ‘hostile environment’ on campus.

In the face of the framework of injunctions, police brutality and the red light ranking from Spiked!, I feel Warwick students are not afraid, or feel restricted to speak out against injustices. Their personal sense of freedom is not limited and long may it continue that way.