It was brought to the attention of editors at The Michigan Daily in February of 2007 that one of the writers who contributed to the text of this editorial, Devika Daga, committed acts of plagiarism in several other articles. While we have found no instances of plagiarism in this particular editorial, there is a possibility that there may have been.
All editorials in The Michigan Daily represent the views of the members of its editorial board. The potential plagiarism has no weight on the arguments presented in this editorial and the editors stand by those arguments.

For those who missed it, Bill Keller, the executive editor of The New York Times, visited the University's law school this past Monday. Keller came to deliver the University Senate's 16th annual Davis, Markert, Nickerson Lecture sponsored by the Academic and Intellectual Freedom Fund. His lecture, titled "Editors in Chains: Secrets, Security and the Press," focused on his experiences during the Bush administration and particularly on the controversy surrounding the Times's decision to report on two highly classified government programs. Despite the historical and academic significance of this lecture series, this year's installment was scheduled during fall study break in an auditorium that has proven to have insufficient capacity in the past. In order to reach out to students, faculty and community members, the event's organizers must put as much thought into logistics as choice of speaker.

The Davis, Markert, Nickerson Lecture on Academic and Intellectual Freedom was established by the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs in an effort to make amends for the University's treatment of three professors in 1954. During the height of the McCarthy era, then-University president Harlan Hatcher suspended three professors for their refusal to testify before the U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities. Two of them, including a tenured professor, were eventually fired. More than 30 years later, an effort arose to have the University rectify its past actions. The American Association of University Professors, which had censured the University back in 1957 following the professors' dismissal, urged the University Board of Regents to take appropriate action. Though neither the Regents nor University administrators would take action, the Faculty Senate Assembly took its own initiative to sponsor the annual lecture commemorating the three professors - H. Chandler Davis, Clement Markert and Mark Nickerson.

The notion of academic and intellectual freedom is central to the type of discourse that should occur at a university. Such topics, however, don't always fit cleanly into a particular student's curriculum. In addition to honoring three persecuted scholars, the lecture series serves an important purpose by providing a forum for education and discourse about freedom of the mind.

It is a shame, then, that although Keller's talk was a worthy addition to the series, its planning was less than perfectly executed. Many students were unaware of the event, which merited more solid promotion. If students managed to catch a glimpse at one of the few posters floating around campus, chances are that they were out of town for fall break anyway. Perhaps Oct. 16 was the only day the harried executive editor of the country's most prominent newspaper could deign to visit Ann Arbor, but such an oversight in scheduling leaves the impression that the faculty senate isn't much interested in whether undergraduates can attend the Davis, Markert, Nickerson Lecture.

It's perhaps just as well, however, that comparatively few students were in the crowd at the law school's Honigman Auditorium. While that stately venue certainly lends speakers an aura of intellectual gravitas, it's simply not big enough for a prominent event. The tremendous overflow crowds there for the intellectual freedom lecture Noam Chomsky gave in 2004 should have been a clear sign to seek a larger space.

Given the historical and academic significance of the lecture, one would hope that such logistical problems would be avoided. The lecture offers an annual opportunity to consider the state of academic and intellectual freedom. Students have as much of an interest in academic freedom as anyone in the University community - perhaps more, considering that there are no tenured undergraduates - and deserve consideration in the planning for next year's lecture.