- Says Holtz elsewhere in his letter:
To endure, a scholar-teacher's academic freedom must be grounded on competence and integrity, including accuracy "at all times," a respect for others' opinions, and the exercise of appropriate restraint. Without adherence to these standards, those such as yourself invested with tenure's power can carelessly and arrogantly intimidate and silence the less-powerful and then raise the shields of academic freedom and free expression against all attempts to stop such abuse.
Again, the precedent this suggests is sweeping. No academic who speaks or writes with any regularity, whether in the classroom or at conferences or in academic journals or blog posts, can possibly meet the standard of accuracy "at all times." If tenure can be revoked for failing that standard, every tenured professor is at the mercy of administrative whims. An inaccuracy can always be documented. And the graduate instructor, along with many other members of the academy, would obviously fail the test of "a respect for others' opinions" if those others include, for example, people who believe that gay marriage should be illegal.
Without knowing anything else about this story besides what's written in this piece, I have to disagree with Friedersdorf here. It sounds like the guy was fired for libel, libel that led to a young woman being potentially placed in peril. This doesn't sound like it's about free academic inquiry. One may not be able to be factual "at all times," as we all make mistakes, but we can at least attempt to be accurate and to fact check that which seems unlikely to be true (i.e. act in good faith). Plus the followup that it's prejudiced to be against prejudiced people, because having a prejudiced outlook is one opinion among many, is so old and tired that I can't believe someone of Friedersdorf's stature is repeating it. But really, that's beside the point here. The subject matter isn't important. What's important is that in the university's view, the professor acted libelously and recklessly, and potentially made the university responsible for the woman's safety.