Self censorship in this case means censure by professional colleagues. As opposed to censure by the executive class. Executives are far more sensitive to Twitter mobs than professional colleagues.

The medical and legal profession also censures fellow practitioners who, regardless of their basis in scientific or factual thinking, bring infamy to the profession through recklessness or callousness to the wellbeing of others.

Tenure is arguably more relevant than ever to the degree that you believe a tenured professor has some special right as an employee to spout off controversially on Twitter or a blog without professional repercussions. I have some trouble making that argument though.

Certainly it's not true of professionals in general. While I get the idea behind tenure, what is the argument that a tenured CS professor has a particular right to express controversial political opinions that a senior engineer at a large technology company does not?

(Though there are other arguments such as said professor maybe should be able to work on some idea other people think is a dead end while it's probably reasonable that the engineer's manager can just tell them work on it on your own time if you want.)

It used to be that twitter mobs couldn't get tenured professors fired, just have their guest lecture spots cancelled. Now they can have them fired.

This won’t protect the views of the public though, it will just protect the views of the administrative class.

> privileged elite class

Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class." They're research/teaching specialists. Your talking point sounds straight out of some right-wing website/tv channel.

Sorry, I should have added ‘’ around ‘privileged elite class’ to be more clear that it is certainly a label up for debate.

Unfortunately, with the destruction of many jobs due to outsourcing and the shrinking middle class, there are a growing % (and number) of citizens who would consider tenured professors (and their surrounding bureaucracy) an elite institution that looks down on their way of life. Treading this carefully might be necessary since their voting power is growing.

And in this case, we're talking about assigning power from the professional class to the executive class, whilst in the same breath bashing Twitter "mobs".

> Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class."

What is tenure if not a privilege? And if it isn't then what's the problem here? If tenure isn't something valuable then why are we discussing a story about it being taken away?

EDIT: Just lol at the downvotes and the comments here. Lots of snark, personal attacks, but no one actually able to explain how tenure is not a privilege.

Ah yes, the "privileged elite class" consisting of underpaid professors, and the oppressed have finally risen up to turn the power to control speech back over to administrators where that power rightly belongs.

Really depends on the field. Prestigious profs leading departments or research institutes are making multiples of $100k, even if an average niche humanities profs are making waaaaaay less. And tons of people are trapped in adjunct work.

> Ah yes, the "privileged elite class" consisting of underpaid professors, and the oppressed have finally risen up to turn the power to control speech back over to administrators where that power rightly belongs.

Pointless snark that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.

It's a guarantee that someone has been teaching the same thing for years can continue teaching the same thing when political winds shift. It's there so that people such as yourself can't replace them with those whose views they prefer. You classify professors as if they are all the same, which means you're creating a straw man to weaken the position as whole without actually providing any sort of specific point to argue about.

How else would you consider professors to be privileged? How do you consider them elite?

> It's a guarantee that someone has been teaching the same thing for years can continue teaching the same thing when political winds shift.

Yeah. Seems valuable. A privilege, almost.

> It's there so that people such as yourself can't replace them with those whose views they prefer.

Gratuitous personal attack.

> You classify professors as if they are all the same, which means you're creating a straw man to weaken the position as whole without actually providing any sort of specific point to argue about.

What?

> How else would you consider professors to be privileged?

How else? So you admit that they are privileged in one sense, in the sense of having tenure, of not having to fear getting fired for speech, and you're asking me how else they are privilged?

> How else? So you admit that they are privileged in one sense, in the sense of having tenure, of not having to fear getting fired for speech, and you're asking me how else they are privilged?

You're manipulating what I said. The word 'else' is in reference to what other ways do YOU think they are privileged. And you still haven't answered the questions.

> You're manipulating what I said. The word 'else' is in reference to what other ways do YOU think they are privileged.

OK. So you do not admit that tenure is a privilege?

> And you still haven't answered the questions.

You have some nerve. You write a comment filled with snark and personal attacks that doesn't answer any of my questions, and now you demand that I answer your questions?

This is most likely being done to remove professors who are arguing against monoculture of thought and censorship.