Scholarlink

<p> This article investigates how German universities function as collective “discursive spaces” for academic freedom amid debates often framed as “cancel culture.” Drawing on a representative survey of 9,083 full-time academics across 158 institutions in mid-2024, we employed vignettes on four controversial issues – gender-sensitive language in exams, civil clauses in military research, the Middle East conflict, and explanations for crime rates of immigrant groups – to assess expectations for institutional responses. Descriptive analyses reveal that, rather than favoring passive or coercive stances, a broad majority of respondents across disciplines, status groups, and genders endorse universities to facilitate a discursive space for controversial issues. However, when state authorities threaten autonomy by mandating or banning military research clauses, respondents exhibit lower confidence in campus deliberation and greater support for legal action. The analyses also reveal that political orientation shapes preferred modes of engagement: left-leaning academics more readily back their universities to mobilize deliberative measures (e.g., committees, public forums), while right-leaning academics are comparatively less inclined to mobilize such avenues. The findings challenge individualistic conceptions of academic free speech, highlighting its collective negotiation within the administrative frameworks of the university. By shedding light on both enabling and constraining institutional dynamics, the study contributes a nuanced empirical perspective to debates on academic citizenship, institutional resilience, and the conditions under which universities cultivate or curtail academic freedom.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Between “Cancel Culture” and Campus Culture: Debate and Dissent in the Discursive Space of the University

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月28日

查看全文
  • Julian Hamann,
  • Christiane Thompson

摘要

This article investigates how German universities function as collective “discursive spaces” for academic freedom amid debates often framed as “cancel culture.” Drawing on a representative survey of 9,083 full-time academics across 158 institutions in mid-2024, we employed vignettes on four controversial issues – gender-sensitive language in exams, civil clauses in military research, the Middle East conflict, and explanations for crime rates of immigrant groups – to assess expectations for institutional responses. Descriptive analyses reveal that, rather than favoring passive or coercive stances, a broad majority of respondents across disciplines, status groups, and genders endorse universities to facilitate a discursive space for controversial issues. However, when state authorities threaten autonomy by mandating or banning military research clauses, respondents exhibit lower confidence in campus deliberation and greater support for legal action. The analyses also reveal that political orientation shapes preferred modes of engagement: left-leaning academics more readily back their universities to mobilize deliberative measures (e.g., committees, public forums), while right-leaning academics are comparatively less inclined to mobilize such avenues. The findings challenge individualistic conceptions of academic free speech, highlighting its collective negotiation within the administrative frameworks of the university. By shedding light on both enabling and constraining institutional dynamics, the study contributes a nuanced empirical perspective to debates on academic citizenship, institutional resilience, and the conditions under which universities cultivate or curtail academic freedom.