Freedom of Expression Challenged: Scientists’ Perspectives on Hidden Forms of Suppression and Self-censorship

Abstract

The media have become an important arena where struggles over the symbolic legitimacy of expert authority take place and where scientific experts increasingly have to compete for public recognition. The rise of authoritarian and populist leaders in many countries and the growing importance of social media have fueled criticism against scientific institutions and individual researchers. This paper discusses the new hidden forms of suppression and self-censorship regarding scientists’ roles as public experts. It is based on two web surveys conducted among Finnish researchers in 2015 and 2017. We focus on answers to the open-ended questions in these surveys, where respondents reflect upon issues of freedom of expression and the feedback they receive in public arenas. Building on previous research on suppression, “research silencing,” and the “chilling effect,” we discuss the connection between freedom of expression and freedom of inquiry. We make a distinction between four forms of suppression: political and economic control, organizational control, control between rival academics, and control from publics. Moreover, we make explicit and discuss the means, motives, and practices of suppression within each of these four forms.

Science communicators intimidated: researchers' freedom of expression and the rise of authoritarian populism

“…We argue that academic freedom and scientists' freedom of expression mean more than the mere absence of open control mechanisms and censorship [Väliverronen and Saikkonen, 2020]. They depend also on the political culture and the freedom of public debate.…”

“…Populists have particularly criticized scientists and public experts involved in environmental research such as climate change [Mede and Schäfer, 2020;Saarinen, Koivula and Keipi, 2020] and issues like immigration, multiculturalism or sex and gender [Ylä-Anttila, 2018;Väliverronen and Saikkonen, 2020]. One of the prime examples of the criticism against liberal values is Hungary where Orbán's government issued a decree that aimed to eliminate gender studies programmes at all Hungarian universities by September 2019.…”

“…The media has become an important arena where struggles over the symbolic legitimacy of scientific knowledge and expert authority take place [e.g. Weingart, 1998;Weingart, 2012;Arnoldi, 2007;Väliverronen and Saikkonen, 2020;Väliverronen, 2021]. In public life, scientists and science-based experts are constantly challenged, particularly on various social media platforms.…”

“…Grimm and Saliba, 2017;Scholars at Risk, 2017;Scholars at Risk, 2018], the current movement against active and public scientists is increasingly coming from diverse political activists and groups, industrial lobbyists, think tanks and ordinary citizens in public arenas [e.g. Martin, 2001;Kuehn, 2004;Lewandowsky, Mann et al, 2016;Väliverronen and Saikkonen, 2020].…”

“…Thus, right-wing populists are skillfully taking advantage of the phenomenon Wodak [2015, p. 238] calls the "right-wing perpetuum mobile", where populists tease the liberal media with poignant and infuriating arguments in gaining attention for their political agenda. These arguments are targeted not only against liberal politicians but also increasingly against academics who are active public debates, particularly on immigration, multiculturalism, gender and sexuality, social policy or environmental issues [McDonald, Barriault and Merritt, 2020;Väliverronen and Saikkonen, 2020].…”