The Times newspaper; a paragon of hypocrisy about free speech?

The Times exposed its own hypocrisy today when it said that universities 'should not turn a blind eye to baseless propaganda' - ignoring its own promotion of climate scepticism through publishing the views of Matt Ridley.

Under a headline 'Spreading Falsehoods' a Times leader today criticises three named academics for spreading conspiracy theories, variously about how the WHO or the West was using the C virus as a bioweapon. Well, to make my own view clear, I condemn anybody who spreads such nonsense and I call upon them to stop it. But should the universities take action against them? I think not! 

The Times says:
 'Real news outlets are reporting the state of medical knowledge and safeguarding public health. Their efforts are being undermined by dilettantes who lack specialist knowledge. Those who share conspiracy theories under the guise of academic affiliation are trading in falsehood. Their institutions should not turn a blind eye to baseless propaganda'.(1)

It's very interesting that The Times should complain about how science is being undermined by 'dillettantes who lack specialist knowledge' when it publishes climate scepticism by Matt Ridley. Take for example the article published in 2018 by Matt Ridley discussing theories of global cooling when he says, for example:

'the argument that the world is slowly slipping back into a proper ice age after 10,000 years of balmy warmth is in essence true' (2) 

This is utter nonsense of course. The climate science tells us that the temperature of the Earth is increasing much more quickly than anything that can be seen in the last 10,000 years or more and that this is associated with anthropogenically induced warming. No doubt Matt Ridley might excuse his article as being a wind-up or something; but then I'm sure the peddlars of the current conspiracy theories have parallel excuses.

The plot thickens when one considers the articles that the Times' publishes on protecting academic freedoms. Only a couple of months ago the newspaper published an article by the Education Secretary Gavin Williamson which said, among other things:

'The University of Oxford has adopted strong codes of conduct that champion academic freedom and free speech, explicitly recognising that this may sometimes cause offence. Every university should promote such unambiguous guidance'. (3) 

Aha, so, putting these various strands together, Universities must defend free speech even though people are offensive.....but they must crack down on academics who spread offensive conspitary theories? 

This doesn't make sense really - unless you come to the conclusion that it's ok to be anti-science if this doesn't offend your own prejudices, or to put it more bluntly 'Freedom of speech is ok so long as it isn't offensive to my own general worldview'. It's called hypocrisy.

But, for universities, you do get the impression that they cannot win. Somebody is always going to complain whatever happens on campus. 

Perhaps in view of all this, universities should simply ignore what opinion leaders say in The Times and regard these articles instead merely as sometimes irritating pieces of entertainment.



(1) 'Spreading Falsehood' Times Leader, April 11th page 29
(2) Matt Ridley 'Global Cooling is not worth shivering about - The Earth is very slowly slipping back into a proper ice age but technology should enable civilisation to survide it' January 8th 2018
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/global-cooling-is-not-worth-shivering-about-pmdn8gp07
(3) Gavin Williams February 7th 2020 'If universities can't defend free speech Government will' https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/if-universities-cant-defend-free-speech-the-government-will-jwmnfznh7