In a potential move against its own freedom of speech policy, ANU has proposed a new Posting and Advertising policy in an ‘On Campus’ email sent out on Tuesday 1 October.

The policy, which is open for consultation until Friday 18 October (extended from 11 October), proposes stringent conditions on “the use of posters, banners and other display materials on campus”. It strictly limits the display of posters, flags or banners to be only those used by ANU students and staff, and requires that any posters “include information on the individual or the affiliated club, society, organisation [sic] or union which produced them”. Perhaps most controversially, the policy also threatens removal of any posters attached to university infrastructure other than designated noticeboards, or those from “unaffiliated” or unidentified groups. 

Under the proposal, the display of any flag or banner on campus would also require at least two weeks’ notice and would be subject to the unilateral approval of the Director of Facilities and Services Division, or the Director of Residential Experience Division for any display within residential accommodation. 

In the comments of a post made about the proposal on facebook group ANU Schmidtposting, students termed the policy “draconian”, “absurdly broad” and “outrageous”. The On Campus email was promptly met with the distribution of an ANUSA open letter to “Tear Down the ANU Poster Policy”, and instead conduct “a consultation process from first principles to identify what issues are important to the community for any postering or advertising”. Simultaneously, a petition launched by Students and Staff Against War went further to condemn any limitation on poster display as a “vicious crackdown on free speech”. 

The requirement that anyone displaying a poster be identifiable and traceable, as the petition suggests, “implies a desire for the university to trace and police all political speech, both by individuals and by organisations.” 

The ANU does currently have some existing policy on the topic, such as the (much more restrained) policy on ANU-affiliated advertising, and student and staff codes of conduct which mandate generally that individuals “act in accordance with University goals, policies and procedures”. However, the University also currently upholds that “This obligation does not detract from the notion of academic freedom where members of the University examine social values and criticise and challenge societal beliefs in the honest search for knowledge and its dissemination.” 

Further, the current ANU Academic Freedom and Freedom of Speech policy states its aims as ensuring “that the freedom of lawful speech of staff and students of the University and visitors to the University is treated as a paramount value and, therefore, not restricted nor its exercise unnecessarily burdened”, defining that freedom as that “of academic staff and students of the University and visitors to the University to engage in all forms of lawful expressive conduct including oral speech and written, artistic, musical and performing works and activity and communication using social media (emphasis added).” 

The policy to some extent mirrors the Campus Access Policy introduced by the University of Sydney in July, condemned in USyd’s Honi Soit as a “direct retaliation to the months-long Gaza Solidarity Encampment” and an overarching attempt ​​to stop students and staff “from organising and speaking out.” 

The policy is proposed in the context of what has been a tense year for student-university administration relationships. This includes broad scale student protest against ANU’s academic and investment ties with Israel and the genocide in Gaza, the NTEU flying banners and undergoing steadfast negotiation to ensure better staff pay outcomes, and a heavily-postered ANUSA election period drawing record level voter engagement. These methods of protest, advocacy and political discussion could all be seen to conflict with the proposed guidelines. 

The policy is broad-reaching and arguably vague in scope, providing limits on “the showing of any other kind of visual display”, banning content that might be termed “obscene”, and threatening that “Where a University club, association, organisation or union is involved in a policy breach, the university may “de-fund and/or disaffiliate that group”. The lack of definition in what these sections mean precisely has prompted concern in some students as to potential chilling effects that might arise should the proposal be formalised. 

The University has communicated that “ANU staff and students are encouraged to participate in the community consultation. To provide your feedback, please read the policy and send your thoughts to fixmycampus@anu.edu.au.”