Recent comments from NYU Stern School of Business Professor Scott Galloway spark controversy.
According to Breitbart, during an HBO show, Scott Galloway critically addressed what he sees as a double standard in university responses to hate speech.
On HBO’s “Real Time”, Professor Scott Galloway expressed concerns about inconsistencies in how hate speech is managed on college campuses. His main argument pointed out that the violations of policy regarding antisemitic expressions seem to be approached more leniently compared to other forms of hate speech.
Galloway used a theoretical instance involving aggressive behavior against black students to emphasize the immediate reaction such actions usually receive—he argued a swifter, more decisive action would follow, unlike the reaction to antisemitic incidents.
University faculties face scrutiny over extremist support
According to Galloway, the faculty members supporting extremist ideologies pose a significant challenge to the integrity of educational institutions. He suggests that those who support violent or oppressive regimes should be dismissed by their respective universities.
In his discourse, Galloway highlighted the necessity of universities maintaining a responsible and critical environment. He pointed out the lack of critical thinking when it comes to scenarios involving hate speeches against Jews, stating this is where freedom of speech is most abused.
Striking remarks on the disparity in first responders' actions
Galloway voiced a powerful example to illustrate his point: if a person were to act hatefully towards African Americans, it would lead to a severe and quick response, potentially involving law enforcement or even the national guard if the situation escalated:
The double standard here is pretty striking. Dylann Roof goes into a Charleston church and kills nine members of a black church, if I went down to the plaza of any of these universities with a white hood, a Confederate flag, and signs and started saying, globalize Dylann, kill black people, there’d be no need for context, we wouldn’t be talking about free speech, I’d be out of academia. And if I whipped up students into a frenzy such that we started harassing non-white students on their way to the library and I started getting in their face or even throwing things at them — and that has happened — we wouldn’t be having a conversation about the First Amendment, we’d call in the f*cking National Guard.
Galloway also discussed the maturity and accountability expected at the university level. Although he gave room for youthful indiscretions, he stressed that faculty members do not have such leeway.
"And what is clear to me is that free speech is at its freest when it’s hate speech against Jews," Galloway remarked, addressing the skewed protection under the guise of free speech.
Implications of poor judgment by university faculties
More so, Galloway's frustration extended to how current faculty handle their roles in fostering a learning environment. His comments were sharp and direct regarding what should be done with those who fail in their duties:
I think you’ve got to cut a 19-year-old a pretty wide berth. The point of being 19 is you act stupid and you learn and you move on. I’m glad a camera wasn’t following me around…when I was 19. The faculty, if we made the mistake of hiring you and you want to support Islamic Jihad or the Islamic Republic, then, we made a mistake and we should rectify that mistake. We pay these people, and if they are not taking the temperature down and they lack the critical thinking that they can’t criticize a murderous autocracy, pretty simple, they should be fired.
Conclusion
Galloway’s discourse at HBO’s “Real Time” highlighted a serious inconsistency in how hate speech is treated across university campuses, particularly criticizing the mild responses to antisemitic incidents.
Through his condemnatory narratives, he calls for a universal standard where all forms of hate speech are equally reprehensible and punishable.
Moreover, he demands accountability from faculty who support or encourage extremist ideologies, proposing termination for those lacking in critical responsibility for their educational duties.
