In Professor Kyle Hetrick’s FYW 150 course, titled “University Issues,” students write a formal paper drawing upon the themes found in texts they have read relating to freedom of speech and cancel culture. This essay is the conclusion of the second unit of the course and is worth 20% of students’ final grade. You can download the full prompts and grading guidelines here.

The formal paper assignment asks students to select and respond to one of three prompts:

1. Explain and defend how far free speech should go.
2. Explain and defend your opinion concerning the use of call out/cancel culture tactics to silence distasteful types of speech.
3. Should students be able to opt out of college assignments based on misgivings that they have about the materials that are involved with that assignment?

Professor Hetrick notes how when students respond to these prompts, they may encounter some difficulty expressing the general categories in which they believe cancel culture should be practiced. For example, in response to a specific incident, they may easily say “this should be canceled,” but in terms of making an overarching argument of what categories of speech should be canceled, it can sometimes be difficult to state the general type of speech that should be policed and removed.

He comments, “[This difficulty] reminds me of the famous statement made by Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart when asked to define what pornography is: “I know it when I see it.” Obviously that standard is not good enough to make usable obscenity law; likewise, can a student set parameters of what is cancelable with it being more precise than “I know it when I see it”?

Here is a reading that Professor Hetrick assigns during this unit, and that he notes would be particularly relevant for students responding to prompt #2: “A Racial Slur, a Viral Video, and a Reckoning” by Dan Levin.