Chronicle poll results: Resignation of Liz Magill
search
PollOur readers share their views

Chronicle poll results: Resignation of Liz Magill

We asked our readers if the resignation of University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill was warranted following her testimony to Congress. Here's what they said.

Last week, the Chronicle asked its readers in an electronic poll the following question: “Was the resignation of University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill warranted following her testimony to Congress?” Of the 310 people who responded, 86% said yes, 10% said no, and 4% said they weren’t sure. Comments were submitted by 86 people. A few follow.

Her testimony under oath in front of Congress was abhorrent and a disgusting display of lack of morals. Good riddance, and I hope other spineless elite presidents follow suit.

She should have been given a chance to change her view and policy. The large donor withdrawing his pledge did not allow this to happen.
I did not like her smiling while she gave those awful answers.

As a formerly proud Penn alumnus, sometimes change is needed at the top to indicate that the whole entity is ready to change course and that problematic issues will finally be taken seriously.

Freedom of speech is no cover up for hatred.

University policies around free speech have been inconsistent and hypocritical in recent years, and ultimately it is the responsibility of their presidents to ensure that the policies are clear and consistently enforced.

Her inaction about the various antisemitic incidents on campus were more damning than her testimony.

She was completely tone deaf. She died on the hill of equivocation and moral cowardice.

College presidents picking and choosing which groups to defend from hate is arrogant and appalling.

Her moral and intellectual obtuseness were astounding. Put another way, put any other group in place of Jews and calls for genocide, and what would have been her school’s reaction?

The other two college presidents need to resign or be removed as well.

She was foolish to have listened to her counsel and should at least have been given the opportunity to fix things.

According to her testimony, the college procedures would only be broken if violence were actually accomplished. Mere verbal intimidation does not count. How horrible. PJC

read more:
comments