In August 2020, Rose Ritch, a Jewish USC student, stepped down from her role as student body Vice President amid an online campaign launched by fellow students calling for her resignation due to her vocal support for the State of Israel and Zionism. In November of that year, a Title VI complaint was submitted on Ms. Rich’s behalf by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights, alleging that the University had enabled a hostile environment of anti-Semitism on campus. In July 2022, the U.S. Department of Education announced it had opened an investigation into this complaint. The investigation is ongoing. Throughout the last two years, USC has undergone challenges and growth related to the crisis and how it was handled by the University. Below are several observations and lessons learned. 1. Failing to respond promptly can amplify a crisis. At first, USC’s leadership took a hands-off approach and did not publicly condemn the bullying Ms. Ritch faced. Feeling unsupported by the University’s administration, Ms. Ritch wrote an op-ed that was featured in Newsweek describing how she was harassed because she identifies “as a Jew who supports Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state,” adding, “it was only after I resigned [in August 2020] that the university recognized the need to publicly protect Jewish students from the sort of anti-Semitic harassment I endured.” Indeed, University decisionmakers failed to appreciate the urgency of Ritch’s situation and related outrage among various groups, including free speech advocates, the Jewish community, and other key stakeholders. Through its initial silence, USC forfeited an opportunity to provide its perspective and take a stance on the issue, which became national (and international) news. 2. Communicate empathetically and reiterate your organization’s values. Admirably, the University eventually took a stance publicly. President Carol F. Folt repeatedly and unequivocally communicated USC’s values though letters to the community that condemned the bullying and emphasized efforts to eliminate anti-Semitism at USC. USC also initiated the “Advisory Committee on Jewish Life at USC,” which was charged with studying issues affecting Jewish students. President Folt publicly shared the Committee’s findings and expressed her commitment to implementing its recommendations through consistent communications to the USC community over the course of several months. Media coverage acknowledged these efforts – for example, a Jewish News Syndicate article entitled “USC outlines concrete steps to respond to campus anti-Semitism” wrote that the University was moving “full-force ahead.” And StandWithUs CEO Roz Rothstein said, “Although USC took a long time to make this announcement, these actions are an important step in the right direction.” 3. Effective crisis communications can minimize reputational damage and strengthen organizations and their brands. By the time the Department of Education announced in July 2022 that it had opened an investigation, the University had already communicated to key stakeholders (including the Jewish community) via its steady drumbeat of communications from the past two years the productive steps it had taken so far and its steadfast commitment to the matter. This public commitment helped persuade those previously critical of President Folt’s initial failures that the University was handling the matter appropriately. In an era in which politics are front-and-center on U.S. campuses, and in which the debate about free speech versus safe spaces continues to challenge university administrators, USC’s experience serves as a helpful reminder that silence is often insufficient, and that effective communication during a crisis pays dividends in preventing future harm. Despite USC’s initial failure to take a stance with appropriate urgency, the University redeemed its reputation through clear, consistent, and effective communications supported by concrete action, and today, its relationships with the key stakeholders who were most affected is stronger than before.

Since the Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, federal law has permitted academic institutions to consider race as one of multiple factors in evaluating an individual’s candidacy so long as that consideration helps further the goal of cultivating a diverse student body. This term, the Court will hear oral arguments in a pair of cases challenging the constitutionality of affirmative action and whether an applicant’s race can be considered in the college admissions process. It is widely expected that the Court will overturn Grutter and end race-conscious admissions, which threatens to significantly impact diversity on college campuses and beyond.   Like the Court’s recent blockbuster decision overturning Roe v. Wade, these affirmative action cases will be viewed through a political lens and have both legal and societal implications. As with the abortion decision, which forced employers to speak out and take action, this decision will create a communications challenge for college and university administrators. Charting a Path Forward While it is difficult to know specifically how the Court will frame its decision, now is the time for university administrators and their Boards of Trustees to consider the following questions: To maintain trust and confidence, academic institutions will need to address the concerns of their stakeholder groups with empathy and transparency.  An effective communications strategy in this regard will: With all the uncertainty that the Supreme Court’s decision may bring, one thing is guaranteed: college administrators will be expected to speak. The considerations above are one aspect of a successful communications plan. Ultimately, universities that demonstrate a keen understanding of their stakeholders and communicate accordingly will be able to manage this situation most effectively.