[de_nied]

That's because the author in question is the one who had their funding cut.

Their research revolves around "Critical Data Theory" which sounds very stemmy at first, but looking deeper it has nothing to do with stem and is in the sociology department that focuses on oppression. Based on critical theory (remember critical race theory?), they study oppression in how people archive historical records.

Another professor pretending to be of a technical nature, yet in reality is just writing op-eds. No different than a NYT hit piece.

Go look at their undergrad degree and google their field. It tries everything in its power to attempt to look like a technical field, while just being another DEI course.

[watwut]

There is nothing wrong with studying past oppression.

But of course some people love to make it hard to study it, because it is uncomfortable to hear about it on the emotional level

[votepaunchy]

The question under consideration is whether we should be compelled under threat of violence to fund this speech.

[de_nied]

My understanding is that it isn't about documenting oppression but rather how current methods of archiving can be oppressive and have "cultural bias".

I may be wrong on this, but this is generally what critical theory and its sub fields are all about.