ABSTRACT
UK universities are caught between two public narratives – that they are either restricting legitimate freedom of speech, or allowing Islamist extremists to abuse that freedom with impunity – and these conflicting narratives are driven by powerful voices outside Higher Education. This chapter examines the role played in the university freedom of speech wars by the neoconservative think tank the Henry Jackson Society, which defends the Prevent Duty and criticises universities for failing to check the supposed growth of Islamist extremism on campus. It also explores the role of the online political magazine Spiked in promoting an anti-interventionist libertarian approach to freedom of speech. These organisations push students to opposite extremes in the freedom of speech debate (no-platforming and libertarianism). The chapter contrasts these organisations’ views of students by examining evidence of students’ own views. It draws on various surveys to explore their attitudes to freedom of speech, and also the major AHRC-funded Re/presenting Islam on Campus project (2015–18) to examine their views about Islam, Islamophobia and the Prevent Duty. It shows there is now clear evidence that the Prevent Duty is having a chilling effect on the freedom of speech of a significant proportion of Muslim staff and students.
