Free of expression

I have not been able to write a readable piece about what follows. Whatever I do, it comes across as cynical and angry. So I have given up. This month’s column will not be a running story, but a statement of facts in bullet points:

• On 7 December 2023 TU Delft broadcast the TU Delft Talkshow via livestream.
• The programme was presented by the Head of Corporate Communications. There was no independent presenter or editor asking unexpected or critical questions.
• In this setting that was completely under their own control, Rector Magnificus Tim van der Hagen stated on behalf of the Executive Board that freedom of expression does not belong on campus. He continued: “no demonstrations, no banners, or anything similar, and no statements that people may find offensive.”
• This led to criticism. Internally, in the form of emails expressing concern, and publicly as part of a wider argument about how statements like these show a basic lack of understanding of academic values among university administrators.
• The Executive Board did not address these criticisms.
• In the version of the Talkshow that appeared on YouTube, these statements had suddenly been cut from the recording.
• When Delta’s Editorial Office saw this and wanted to check what Van der Hagen had said in the removed part, they could only do so because a suspicious columnist had downloaded the original livestream before it was taken offline.
• Only when Delta asked the Chair of the Executive Board for clarification did he issue a statement.
• In his statement (see the box below this article), Van der Hagen claims that he had already been dissatisfied with his statements during the recording.
• The livestream of 7 December was not live. The programme had been recorded one week earlier.
• One week is enough time to do a minor edit in a video when you believe that you have said something indefensible.
• The difference between Van der Hagen’s original words and those in his statement to Delta is merely that he no longer explicitly uses the term ‘freedom of expression’. Otherwise, he repeats everything that he said earlier: “demonstrations, banners and statements that people may find offensive […] because they […] could be experienced as hurtful […] do not belong on campus.”
• No one – not the Works Council, Student Council, Supervisory Board, deans, directors, professors, nor anyone else – has distanced themself from this publicly.

I have an opinion about this. But if I express it here, people may find it offensive. So instead, I will close with two questions to readers:

• Is it possible to educate critical and democratically minded engineers if students on our campus are forbidden from practicing the activities that are part of being engaged citizens?
• How many societal and scientific developments would never have been possible if you were not allowed to say anything at universities that could potentially be a cause of offence to someone?