Collective action required to combat censorship

By Libby D’Orvilliers

As I am sure many of you are aware, over the past two weeks celebrity late-night show host Jimmy Kimmel was a hot topic in the media, while he was ironically momentarily off the air. On Sept. 17 Kimmel made verbal commentary on air surrounding the assasination of political commentator Charlie Kirk, which resulted in his show being suspended. While Kimmel’s show has since been reinstated and resumed production as of Sept. 23, this high-profile series of events garnered such large scale media attention and offers a great opportunity for us as diligent citizens to continue an ever-increasingly important conversation about censorship.

Let us define censorship. The American Civil Liberties Union defines censorship as “the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are ‘offensive.’” Whether or not you think Kimmel’s statements were “offensive” or tasteful or not, is not the point in this particular piece. The main point here is that censorship is happening in a country that touts freedom of speech and expression so fervently that it should be most concerning.

Censorship does not always have to come in such high-profile cases, such as Kimmel’s, but it can even be happening right under our noses.

Book bans are happening on smaller-scales all across the nation in an attempt to censor and restrict what information not only students are reading, but even what they have access to. The American Library Association’s 2024 report on the top most challenged books of the year, says 2,452 unique titles were challenged to be removed from libraries. This association even has a week every year dedicated to acknowledging the astronomical amount of censorship happening in libraries and schools across the country called “Banned Books Week.” It also seems appropriate to note that this year’s “theme” of the week, which runs from Oct. 5 through Oct.11, is “Censorship Is So 1984 — Read for Your Rights.”

Clearly, censorship is not always as obvious and extreme as it is in the George Orwell novel “1984” that the ALA is alluding to — it is happening in our country every single day, all in the great year of 2025.

In a “closer to home” example, most of us on the campus are aware of the recent termination of Rider adjunct professor Kate Ecke and how her expulsion from her position was in reaction to affronting political comments made on her personal Facebook account regarding the assasination of Charlie Kirk. This is not an isolated incident as it has been reported that several other institutions of higher education also terminated professors within the past month over statements they had made.

According to a Sept. 22 New York Times article, the national American Association of University Professors is aware of retaliation against approximately 60 professors and teachers regarding their speech since Kirk’s Sept. 10 assassination.

 I must digress a moment here to clarify that deliberate hate speech or speech that is inciting violence should not and cannot be tolerated under the guise of “free speech.”

Again, outside of hate speech, whether these comments were in good taste or not is not the point. If you do not consider these instances as indicative of a larger-scale problem of censorship, it is probably time you reassess.

Additionally, we can take a look at President Trump’s recent Executive Order 14253 and his administration’s subsequent letter to the secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. The Trump administration’s letter said that the government will begin reviewing numerous Smithsonian museums to ensure that their content is in “alignment with American ideals” among other “standards.” This is a prime example of the looming threat of governmental-level censorship.

I do not know about you, but one example of an “American ideal” that comes to my mind is the freedom of speech and expression, just to name one.

Does all of this scare you? It should.

The question then becomes, what are we going to do about it? What do we do with this fear? — I will tell you. We speak up when others have lost their space and ability to speak. We contact our representatives in government. We read. We learn. Finally — and perhaps most importantly — we continue to refuse to be silent. 

To bring this piece full circle, yes, standing up for a large-scale celebrity like Kimmel by posting on social media is great and all, but let it be more than a one-time action in support of a high-profile figure. Let the show’s reinstatement serve as an example of how collective action can combat censorship. 

It is about time to show the same energy and outrage to all other areas of censorship so that the “average citizen” like me and you, still have freedom to express ourselves — or before you know it, there will be no one left with a voice.

Libby D’Orvilliers is a senior psychology major