It is somewhat ironic that in staging a protest before and during President Richard Brodhead’s speech to undergraduates Tuesday, those students were actually doing what Brodhead was preparing to encourage students to do more often.
The protesting students found an issue that concerned them and instead of sitting by idly, they took action—unfurling a banner emblazoned with a question about their cause on the stage as Brodhead was about to speak.
But while the protesters should be applauded for their devotion, there is a fine line between making a powerful statement and taking that statement too far.
Unfortunately, the protest at Brodhead’s speech crossed that line.
By standing on stage with that banner, the protesters ensured that nearly 500 students thought about this issue, and perhaps students who were unaware of what the cause was became more informed. The point the protesters were trying to make, however, was made after a minute. It was unnecessary for the protesters to remain on the stage the entire time Brodhead spoke.
An effective protest wins people to the cause; this protest probably alienated people.
Brodhead, as soon as he saw the banner, told the protesters that he was more than happy to discuss the issue with them. At that point, the protesters would have done well to graciously exit the stage and engage Brodhead with a question after his speech.
Instead, by remaining on the stage and refusing to answer Brodhead, the protesters only looked rude and disrespectful. It was evident as the members of the audience yelled at the protesters to get off the stage that the protest had crossed the line into ineffectiveness.
Brodhead and the rest of the administration handled the situation with aplomb. When Brodhead moved to the side of the stage to deliver his remarks, he acted entirely appropriately. He made it clear that he is willing to listen to students’ concerns and answer any questions they pose to him. He was not, however, going to allow the protest to detract from his talk.
The administrators did not forcibly remove the protesters, which would have only been more disruptive. Again, this was the correct move on the part of the administration.
We applaud Brodhead and the administrators for the manner in which they dealt with the protest.
We are encouraged by the passion the protesters feel about what they consider to be a worthy cause. In this setting, however, the way the protest was carried out was not appropriate and may well have been counterproductive. We would like to see more activism on campus and more discussion about these important issues. That activism, however, needs to take place in a tasteful and appropriate manner in order for it to have an impact on campus.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.