Barnard College at Columbia University has spent the past several years insisting that it takes antisemitism and extremism on its campus seriously. But when asked to address concerns involving one of its own professors, the administration found only one thing worthy of a response: the labeling of an image.
Read more The Dem ‘big tent party’ is doomed
That contrast says more than another canned statement about campus climate and “zero-tolerance” policies ever could.
On July 31, Protect Our Campus published an article in American Thinker examining a growing problem on American campuses: professors who did not merely comment on the anti-Israel protest movement, but actively supported, defended, and in some cases celebrated the disruptive, and sometimes violent, activism carried out by students.
Barnard professor Shayoni Mitra was a particularly revealing example mentioned.
Mitra had opposed Columbia’s suspension of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace (both suspended for violating university policy during the 2024 encampments), participated in a faculty walkout supporting the arrested protesters, and, after demonstrators violently occupied Hamilton Hall and renamed it “Hind’s Hall,” wrote in celebration: “For 22 hours we had Hind’s Hall.”
Students involved in the movement Mitra supported faced arrests, suspensions, and disciplinary proceedings. Yet the faculty members who encouraged and even participated alongside them have received far less scrutiny and oftentimes no consequence.
That was the point of our article, and it remains the point now.
When a professor publicly embraces a movement that has included occupations, repeated rule violations, intimidation, and antisemitic rhetoric, a university should at least be willing to explain where it believes the boundaries of faculty responsibility lie.
Barnard was given that opportunity.
Protect Our Campus contacted the college before publication in American Thinker regarding Mitra and her record. The administration responded with a stock response referencing its “Office of Nondiscrimination.” Professor Mitra’s name was not mentioned, nor were any specifics from our outreach responded to.
After the article appeared, Barnard was again invited to respond to the substance of its concerns. It neglected to.
But it did, however, see fit to engage with the credits of the article’s illustration.
Read more The Pride Flag and Jewish Self-Sabotage
In the first display of personalized or specific communication, Barnard’s Director of Public Affairs contacted Protect Our Campus and American Thinker because the AI-generated image accompanying the piece was not, in the college’s view, clearly labeled enough. He noted that Barnard’s legal team had flagged the matter.
The exchange would have been unremarkable had Barnard shown the same attentiveness and consideration to the content of the article.
It did not.
And that is where a simple communication about an image label reveals a much larger issue about institutional priorities.
Universities today are extraordinarily sophisticated when it comes to reputation management. They have communication offices, legal departments, consultants, task forces, and carefully drafted policies. When something threatens the institution’s image, machinery begins moving very quickly.
The response becomes far less reliable when the problem is internal.
Barnard did not need to agree with the criticism of its professor. A substantive response could have defended her actions as protected academic expression. It could have challenged the characterization of her activism. It could have explained how Barnard separates faculty political activity from professional responsibility.
Any of those answers would have shown that the college was prepared to confront or at least acknowledge the issue. Its silence shows something else.
Barnard may consider matters of AI image attribution and faculty conduct to be entirely separate. But for everyone watching how universities all over the United States demonstrate what merits attention when it comes to extremism on campus, Barnard’s case shows that they are clearly part of the same pattern.
Read more Trump And Republicans Are Cutting Healthcare Costs, Dropping Medicaid Prices By 3.5%
Image generated by ChatGPT.