Pepperdine Statement on “Yes On 8” Television Ads

Jim Burroway

October 14th, 2008

“George Pepperdine” — I don’t know if that’s his real name or if it’s a pseudonym in honor of Pepperdine University’s founder — left a statement from Pepperdine University in our comments section. This statement by Pepperdine University president Andrew K. Benton addresses the recent controversy over the “Yes on 8” television ads which prominently displays Pepperdine’s name.


M E M O R A N D U M

TO: University Faculty

FROM: Andrew K. Benton

RE: University Neutrality and Academic Freedom

DATE: October 14, 2008

I want to provide an update on an issue that weighs heavily on many of our minds: encouraging academic freedom while refraining from political endorsement by Pepperdine University. As most are aware, Yes on 8 ads airing on television and radio feature one of our professors. The Pepperdine name is prominently displayed in the current round of ads and many vocal supporters and opponents of Prop 8 see the opinions expressed as not only the professor’s, but Pepperdine’s as well.

Many of our professors write op-eds, books and give speeches; and they are appropriately identified with Pepperdine University. My first reaction to this series of television ads was that Pepperdine was too prominent. Many on the faculty disagreed, some agreed strongly. At the faculty conference I learned that a disclaimer would satisfy the professor and others who were involved. We offered language that was simple and clear, and while we knew the firestorm would continue in some quarters, we felt a straightforward disclaimer would allow the professor his right to speak and our right to remain outside any role of endorsement in the political fray. The next day, I learned that the professor and those promoting Proposition 8 preferred to withdraw Pepperdine’s name completely. We agreed. It was a change from a position announced just the day before, but it seemed a stronger measure and appropriate.

Just prior to running a second ad, the campaign announced to us that in their opinion it would be more effective if Pepperdine’s name was back in. They added a disclaimer, albeit so small and bare, that most do not see it. It was not the language which we had suggested. They did not ask us; they told us what they were going to do, and they did it.

Without any involvement in the campaign, Pepperdine has been lionized and vilified. We have been given credit where it is not due and blamed beyond anyone’s wildest imaginings. I, and perhaps many of you, continue to receive words of praise and condemnation from people who are either thanking us, or sharply criticizing us. Whether the writers are for or against Prop 8, I take no comfort from either position as it puts us where we don’t belong — in partisan politics.

This is a very challenging situation. We believe that the right to freedom of expression must be balanced with the fact that universities cannot endorse political candidates and propositions. We can host debates, we can educate, but we can’t endorse.

We regret when anyone supposes that we are inappropriately involved in a political issue when we are not. We will take whatever measures we deem appropriate to correct the misunderstanding. I will be writing to alumni and donors to explain the delicate nature of the balance we strike. We must not chill the right to free expression, but we must also avoid the appearance (intended or not) of political partisanship.

You can be of service to our institution by helping us clear up this confusion with those who may ask. I appreciate your understanding, your assistance and your patience.

Ben in Oakland

October 14th, 2008

As my german husband would say:

blah, blah, und blah.

Maybe I’m just being cynical– one must really bathe in the stuff if one is dealing with the protectors of morality and tradition– but somehow, I think this process will take about 2 weeks and 6 days.

Here are the key words: “We will take whatever measures we deem appropriate to correct the misunderstanding. I will be writing to alumni and donors to explain the delicate nature of the balance we strike.”

Take that, you villain. If you don’t straighten up right now, we’re gonna have to think about getting kinda tough with you pretty soon.

If they were actually and truly serious about it, they would be seeking an injunction to prevent any further airing of the ads until the offending language is removed.

But we wouldn’t to interfere with the Liawyer (mispelling intentional, if obscure)and his academic freedom, would we.

Jarred

October 14th, 2008

Just prior to running a second ad, the campaign announced to us that in their opinion it would be more effective if Pepperdine’s name was back in.

Of course it’d be more effective to leave Pepperdine’s name in the ad. The problem is, the inclusion of Pepperdine’s name should be based on whether its use accurately reflects Pepperdine’s official stance, not whether the use of the name will be more effective for the campaign.

And that’s the problem with such campaigns: They’re more interested in being effective than in maintaining integrity. Of course, this fact is obvious. But I think it’s important to keep pointing out the obvious in these situations.

jesusislove

October 14th, 2008

WWJD? Not this!

The arrogance of spreading a message of hatred on behalf of Pepperdine brings shame on the institution, the other faculty, and the alumni.

Pomo

October 14th, 2008

I think its a nice letter

Yet Another Alumnus

October 15th, 2008

This is complete and utter B.S. As I’ve posted elsewhere, I’ve been emailing Benton, who has been ignoring me even though our families have known each other for decades, as well as the Provost, Darryl Tippens, and Peterson himself. Darryl has dug in his heels, and Peterson’s personal comments to me are even more bizarre and irrational than his ads. This is not about “academic freedom” — Peterson’s claims have already been established by a court as “false and misleading.” Obviously, Pepperdine makes more money placating the far right than taking principled stands — or no stands at all. I would take any “public pronouncements” with a very large grain of salt. The University can’t have it both ways.

Wendy

October 15th, 2008

The school handled this so poorly. They should have filed an injunction to get their name off the commercials. Or even to get the beefed up disclaimer placed there.

Sapphocrat

October 15th, 2008

Here’s an idea for Pepperdine: Fire the lying gasbag professor for defaming the school’s name. Problem solved.

a former employee

October 15th, 2008

Pepperdine is truly caught between a rock and a hard place. While I was working there, people were fired for being gay. Since Pepperdine is a private institution(no federal funding) they can be as restrictive in their hiring as they want(you must state your religion on the job application). But now they are forced to repudiate the yes on 8 commercials even though they desperately support it.Ha ha ha.Enjoy their discomforture.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.