To the Editor:
President Wright was quoted Wednesday ("Wright comments on Zete derecognition," May 4) as expounding onthe College Counsel's assertion ("Free Speech and its Limits," April 18) that Wright's letters to the community regarding the 2001 Zeta Psi fraternity incident merely constituted his opinion. "It was sort of the community letter that presidents should be able to send from time to time ... my letter did not constitute the basis for any sort of action against Zeta Psi."
Perhaps that statement is true of the second letter President Wright sent to the community, the one that recently disappeared from Dartmouth's website. But by making this argument he is asking the community to forget his first statement, which he published in these pages ("Community Degradation," April 19, 2001)before Zeta Psi had even a single hearing."I am confident that our established procedures will address this matter fairly, deliberately and expeditiously," he wrote then. "We must all make clear that Dartmouth will not tolerate the degradation of any portion of the community."
If I were the disciplinary officer for a company and my direct supervisor sent a letter like President Wright'sto the whole firm before the case came before me, I would have done exactly what Dean Redman did to Zeta Psi. It is laughable that his opinions, so expressed, did not constitute the basis for Zete's "de-recognition."
President Wright's comments raise another issue as well: when will he stop playing "hide the ball" with us? First, he told us that "speech has consequences." Then, when someone pointed out that Dartmouth purports to protect free speech, he "clarified," saying, "Dartmouth has no speech code."
Then, when FIRE recounted the myriad communications from high-level Dartmouthadministrators, which together do comprise a speech code, he mandated that they all be removed from the school's website. Then, when FIRE asked where those letters went, he had the College's lawyer come out and say that the lettershad merely"express[ed] the writers' personal convictions." Finally, after days of being lambasted in The Dartmouth, he says that he should be able to give his opinion (in a very public and official capacity) without permitting the inference that his opinion affects the decisions of administrators who report to him.
President Wright has achieved much for Dartmouth. But on this issue we deserve a full explanation from him, and not just a series of sound bites. By so plainly attempting to pull the wool over our eyes, he undermines his own credibility and the integrity of his position.
