Support Dr. Daniel Povey
What Happened
Student’s month-long occupation of Garland Hall cut off CLSP’s access to its computing grid.
Many people have heard the story of ‘‘John Hopkins professor fired for jeopardizing student safety’’–but is that the whole story? By putting multiple public news articles together, this post aims to provide an as comprehensive and objective view of what actually happened as possible.
- The Protest
- The ‘‘Counter-Protest’’
- The Investigation and Administrative Leave
- The University Decision–Employment Termination
- Facebook’s Conditional Offer
- Povey’s Declination to the Facebook Offer
- Povey’s Remarks
- The Other Side
The Protest
A monthlong sit-in by students protesting a bill that would implement an armed campus police force and the school’s contracts with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Povey says he was frustrated by the protesters after they blocked windows and chained doors, forcing the administration to close the building during the final week of the school’s spring semester. Povey, a speech recognition researcher was responsible for maintaining servers for Hopkin’s Center for Language and Speech Processing, located inside Garland Hall, according to the Baltimore Sun.
Hours before he tried to break into Garland, Povey showed up with signs that read ‘‘Enough With The Progressive [expletive],’’ ‘‘Don’t Make Me Tell Your Mom” and “Let us get back to work.’’
The Washington Post (August 12th)
The incident took place during a month-long sit-in by students who were protesting a bill that would allow Hopkins to create an armed campus police force, as well as the university’s contracts with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Povey said that he was frustrated by the protesters because they had taken over Garland Hall, the main administrative building on campus, which housed servers hosting his and several others’ research. The sit-in escalated on May 1, when students locked down the building, chained the doors shut, covered the windows and forced the administration building to close during the final week of the university’s spring semester.
The lockdown prompted the university to suspend or relocate services such as financial aid, academic advising and student visas.
Povey, a speech recognition researcher, said he was responsible for maintaining the servers for Hopkins’s Center for Language and Speech Processing, which were located inside Garland. After protesters locked down the building, Povey learned that it could take weeks before he could access the servers, according to a statement shared with the Sun. Meanwhile, two of the servers had failed, he wrote, and he was growing increasingly anxious about losing his and others’ research, which would affect the careers of both students and faculty.
But he also didn’t like the protesters’ politics.
Hours before Povey showed up with bolt cutters to break into Garland, he stood outside with signs that read, ‘‘Enough With The Progressive [expletive],’’ ‘‘Don’t Make Me Tell Your Mom” and “Let us get back to work.’’
Inside Higher ED (August 12th)
Povey further accused student and local protesters of lying about what actually happened inside Garland Hall at Hopkins on day 35 of the overall protest, about a week after they forced a shutdown of Hopkins’s main administrative building and chained themselves to walls, railings and staircases.
It [the JHU Sit-In group] also alleges that the university was manipulating the cooling and heating systems inside the occupied administrative building, and that they may have damaged a server Povey was using.
JHU Sit-In is dedicated to resisting what it calls campus militarization, including a proposal for an armed, private police force; ending the university’s dealing with Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and justice for Tyrone West, a black Baltimore resident who was killed by city police during a traffic stop in 2013.
Povey was repeatedly told not enter Garland Hall prior to the exchange, despite his requests to enter the building to access computer servers there, according to the letter.
The ‘‘Counter-Protest’’
Around midnight on May 7, Daniel Povey, 43, led a break-in of Garland Hall in the middle of the night.
'’Being frustrated as the prospect of a long siege at Garland where our computer servers live, I organized a group of what I called ‘‘counter-protesters’’ to try to regain control of the building from the students,’’ Povey said in a statement. ‘‘This was on the evening of May 8th; there was a scuffle and I was carried out of the building by the protesters. They then made allegations to the Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), saying that I had attacked them.
In the statement released by Povey, he argued the protesters actually harmed and scratched him.
The Washington Post (August 12th)
About midnight on May 7, a Johns Hopkins University associate research professor burst into a campus building with bolt cutters hoping to break up a student sit-in and access computer servers there.
The Students Against Private Police group was not available for comment Friday. The lockdown was ended by police the same day as Povey’s break-in; seven students were arrested.
Inside Higher ED (August 12th)
The [JHU Sit-In] group noted that Povey did not say ‘‘anything racially motivated during the actual attack.’’
Regarding the incident, Povey said that he was ‘‘frustrated [by] the prospect of a long siege at Garland where our computer servers live,’’ and ‘‘organized a group of what I called ‘counterprotesters’ to try to regain control of the building from the students.’’
The Investigation and Administrative Leave
The OIE has been investigating the allegations that Povey engaged in violent and aggressive behavior during the incident at Garland Hall, as well as complaints that his conduct was racially motivated. The investigation from the OIE used a quote from Povey saying ‘‘we were met with more violence than we anticipated,’’ as an admission of guilt. During the lockdown of Garland Hall, seven protesters were arrested, four of them being students.
Povey was originally placed on administrative leave following the incident before being fired.
The University Decision–Employment Termination
'’By your own admissions, your actions were premeditated and you expected that your actions could result in a violent confrontation with students and others in or around Garland Hall,’’ the termination letter from Vice Dean for Faculty, Andrew Douglas stated. ‘‘In fact, you believed the group of non-affiliates you brought with you could become violent. As a faculty member at Johns Hopkins University, you created a dangerous situation that could have ended in serious harm to our students, yourself, and others in the community.’’
Hopkins spokesperson Karen Lancaster in a statement, ‘‘the safety, security, and protection of our students and others are of paramount importance to the University. ‘‘[based on the] undisputed facts of the case, the University took interim and now permanent action to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the community.”
Povey also posted the termination letter online, which carries out on Aug. 31, to give students under him the time to find a new advisor.
Povey argued that quote stemmed from him shrugging to lawyers after they asked if he was confident the non-affiliated group brought to Garland would be able to follow instructions no matter what happened. Povey’s termination letter states that he ‘‘flagrantly and unapologetically violated JHU directives’’ to stay away from the building and that he ‘‘created a dangerous situation that could have ended in serious harm to our students, yourself, and others in the community.’’
Povey wrote that he was the one who was hurt, suffering a scratch on his back during a skirmish with protesters.
The Washington Post (August 12th)
Now Povey, who was initially placed on administrative leave, has been fired by Hopkins for jeopardizing student safety, according to an Aug. 8 letter written by Andrew S. Douglas, the university’s vice dean for faculty. Povey posted the termination letter online. It takes effect Aug. 31.
Hopkins spokeswoman Karen Lancaster said the university could not comment on personnel matters but wrote in a statement that ‘‘the safety, security, and protection of our students and others are of paramount importance to the University.’’
She confirmed that a ‘‘troubling incident’’ in early May prompted an investigation and that in response to that incident, based on the ‘‘undisputed facts of the case, the University took interim and now permanent action to ensure the safety and well-being of the community.’’
The school decided to fire Povey after a May incident in which he used bolt cutters to attempt to forcibly enter one of the school’s buildings that had been occupied by student protesters. The school notified Povey of his termination last Thursday, he says.
'’As a faculty member at Johns Hopkins University, you created a dangerous situation that could have ended in serious harm to our students, yourself, and others in the community,’’ reads a copy of the termination letter that Povey posted on his website.
Inside Higher ED (August 12th)
Johns Hopkins University terminated a nontenured associate research professor of speech and language processing who broke into a student sit-in earlier this year with bolt cutters. He says his counterprotest was supposed to be nonviolent and that he wanted to access servers in the occupied building. But protesters accused him of attacking them, and the university says that whatever happened, he put students in danger.
In reality, Povey wrote, he was attacked – not the other way around.
According to Povey’s termination letter, he was suspended and banned from campus in May over allegations that he ‘‘engaged in violent and aggressive behavior when attempting forcibly to enter Garland Hall,’’ and his conduct ‘‘was motivated by racially discriminatory animus and created a hostile environment.’’
Povey has admitted leading a group of people to the campus building around midnight on May 8, carrying bolt cutters. ‘‘You believed the group of nonaffiliates you brought with you could become violent,’’ the termination letter also says. As a faculty member, ‘‘you created a dangerous situation that could have ended in serious harm to our students, yourself and others in the community.’’
'’These actions by a member of our faculty are entirely unacceptable. The safety, security and protection of our students and others are of paramount importance to the university,’’ wrote Andrew S. Douglas, vice dean for faculty. While the university will continue its investigation until it reaches its conclusion, ‘‘your own account of events based on your oral and written statements provides more than sufficient grounds for immediate termination, and we are hereby terminating your appointment with the university.’’
Povey’s termination is effective Aug. 31, so that he may help his graduate student advisees transition in the coming weeks.
In the post to his personal website, Povey said he was leaving to take a job in industry in Seattle, starting next week. He’ll still be working with students and collaborators remotely, he said.
Johns Hopkins has said that it can’t comment on private personnel matters, but that the ‘‘safety, security and protection of our students and others are of paramount importance to the university.’’ A ‘‘troubling incident in early May prompted an investigation,’’ it said, and, based on the ‘‘undisputed facts of the case, the university took interim and now permanent action to ensure the safety and well-being of the community.’’
In May, Povey used bolt cutters to attempt to forcibly enter one of the school’s buildings that had been occupied by student protesters. The school informed him of his termination earlier this month. Afterwards, Povey published a note on his website in which he suggested that he was let go partly because he was a white man while the protesting students were minorities.
School officials wrote in a termination letter to Povey that he brought ‘‘a group of non-affiliates to campus’’ on May 8 and ‘‘created a dangerous situation that could have ended in serious harm to our students, yourself, and others in the community.’’ The university terminated his employment effective Aug. 31.
Facebook’s Conditional Offer
Facebook confirmed on Monday that it has hired a speech recognition researcher who was fired this month from Johns Hopkins University after the university said he put students in danger while trying to enter a building occupied by protesters.
A spokesman for the company told CNBC that it has hired Daniel Povey, who had been a research professor at Johns Hopkins since 2012, according to his LinkedIn profile. Before joining Johns Hopkins, Povey was a researcher at Microsoft as well as IBM.
Povey will work out of Facebook’s offices in Seattle starting on Aug. 19, according to his note. Povey said he will be working on speech recognition for Facebook and will report to Mike Seltzer, a Facebook applied research scientist.
Povey told CNBC he is hoping for the best in his new role, but would not be surprised if controversy follows him.
'’I just wouldn’t expect to last very long at any big Silicon Valley company after expressing the kinds of opinions I have expressed in my leaving message,’’ Povey said in an email.
'’This is a difficult position for us because under normal circumstances, we would not hire someone who was terminated for creating safety concerns at his last employer, but you have also been working for us for a year as a consultant with no issues, and so we believe we should make our own independent decision as to whether your conduct at JHU prevents us from hiring you,’’ Facebook wrote.
However, Facebook told Povey that its decision to do an independent review ‘‘had nothing to do with your political views.’’
Povey’s Declination to the Facebook Offer
Fired Johns Hopkins professor Daniel Povey will not work for Facebook after all, he told CNBC on Friday.
Povey was slated to start working on speech recognition for Facebook out of the company’s Seattle office next Monday. But on Thursday, Facebook placed conditions on the hire that Povey didn’t accept.
Specifically, Facebook told him that he could work as a contractor for six weeks without permission to come onto Facebook’s property, Povey wrote in a note on his website. A full-time offer would be contingent on the results of a Facebook ‘‘investigation into what happened,’’ Povey wrote.
'’I declined that offer,’’ Povey wrote in a note on his website.
In an email to Povey that Facebook shared with CNBC, the company explained it would normally never hire a person who was fired from his last job over safety issues. However, Povey had been working as a contractor for the company already, so it decided to give him a chance to continue his contract while the company investigated.
Povey told CNBC he will likely seek employment from a foreign-owned company or a start-up.
A Johns Hopkins professor who was fired after he tried to use bolt cutters to force his way through a group of student protesters rallying against a private police force on campus has turned down a job at Facebook.
Daniel Povey, who was fired and banned from the Johns Hopkins University campus in Baltimore after he showed up to a May 8 student protest at Garland Hall with bolt cutters, wrote in an email he had turned down an offer at Facebook because he thought it was a disingenuous offer tied to his politics.
'’I believed that if they intended not to hire me, they would need an investigation to justify that decision — so as not to be accused of left-wing bias,” Povey wrote. “So I suspected that they might not have been intending to hire me full-time at all.’’
A spokesperson for Facebook did not return calls for comment Sunday.
In the email, he continued his attacks against what he called ‘‘progresive ideas,’’ saying he was prepared for a similar culture at Facebook.
'’At orientation they make you state your gender pronouns when you introduce yourself; and they have tampons in the mens’ restrooms,’’ he wrote in the email. ‘‘So it’s not a place where you can easily get away with opposing progresive ideas.’’
He said he plans to work with an, as of now, unnamed Chinese company or university in speech recognition and machine learning.
But he added that the terms of employment have not been set and that ‘‘almost certainly it will be one Chinese company or another.’’
'’There are several operations in the Seattle area who do this kind of thing, so I wouldn’t even have to move,’’ Povey wrote. ‘‘I will feel more relaxed among the Chinese because they don’t have American-style social justice warriors.’’
Povey’s Remarks
The Washington Post (August 12th)
Povey, 43, also wrote a 1,600-word essay about what happened, along with a treatise about how he believes white men are discriminated against in ‘‘this environment’’ and how he is expected to act like a ‘‘neutered puppy-dog.’’
'’I may not have my job,’’ Povey concluded, ‘‘but at least I still have my dignity and my independence of thought.’’
'’I may not have my job,’’ Povey said, ‘‘but at least I still have my dignity and my independence of thought.’’
He also believes ‘‘whites, or white males are being discriminated against.’’ and he is expected to behave like a ‘‘neutered puppy-dog.’’
Povey on Thursday also published a note explaining his actions and firing from Johns Hopkins, saying ‘‘I may not have my job, but at least I still have my dignity and my independence of thought.’’
In the note, Povey also suggested he was terminated partly because he was a white man while the protesting students were minorities.
'’White males in this environment seem to be expected to constantly atone for their existence by telegraphing their exclusive concern for every demographic group but their own, like a neutered puppy-dog or some Justin Trudeau man-child,’’ Povey wrote. ‘‘It’s pathetic, in my opinion; and I don’t accept it at all.’’
In his goodbye note, Povey said he has many career options.
'’When this whole thing started I told my friends, if the worst comes to the worst I can always go to China or Russia,’’ Povey wrote. ‘‘I’ll tell you this, though: whatever happens, I will never apologize and I will never back down.’’
Inside Higher ED (August 12th)
The professor, Daniel Povey, shared his notice letter on his website last week–along with the news that he’s leaving Baltimore for a job in industry and is definitely not sorry.
'’I am aware that some people are trying to ‘cancel’ me and get me fired from my next job. See if I care!’’ he said in a lengthy post. ‘‘I’ll tell you this, though: whatever happens, I will never apologize and I will never back down.’’
A ‘‘scuffle’’ ensued, he said, ‘‘and I was carried out of the building by the protesters.’’ The university ‘‘seems not to have been able to substantiate the allegations that I attacked the protesters,’’ he said, but Johns Hopkins ‘‘leadership still decided that I still needed to be fired.’’
While the termination letter says he put students in danger, Povey wrote, he actually told the university that his associates were under ‘‘strict instructions to not retaliate if attacked.’’ He did shrug when he was later asked whether he was confident that they would have been able to follow those instructions no matter what happened, though, he said.
'’So essentially I am being fired for what might have happened, while the students are getting off scot free for things that actually did happen. They actually made false allegations against me, both in public (on Twitter) and to the university authorities. They actually attacked me and hurt me; many of you saw the big scratches on my back. They also threw a lot of punches at the people with me, who showed admirable restraint, although I understand one punch was thrown by a person in my group. They actually shut down Garland and inconvenienced thousands of people, requiring the fire department to cut open the doors to get them out. But they suffer no consequences. Am I sensing just a liiiitle bit of a double standard?’’
What accounts for that, beyond Povey’s faculty status, he asked? ‘‘My feeling is that this mostly has to do with underrepresented minorities, specifically black people (and trans people). There seems to be nothing that Americans, or American institutions, fear more than being accused of racism (or similar isms), which leads to ridiculous spectacles like what we’re seeing here, where such a huge organization can be paralyzed by a handful of deluded kids.’’
If Povey had known in advance ‘‘that everyone inside the building was black (that was what I saw; although from media coverage it seems that there may have been a white trans person in the core group)–I wouldn’t have gone ahead with the counterprotest,’’ he said. ‘‘I’m not an idiot; I know that as a person who demographically ticks all the ‘oppressor boxes,’ I would have to be severely punished for opposing such a group.’’
White men in ‘‘this environment seem to be expected to constantly atone for their existence by telegraphing their exclusive concern for every demographic group but their own, like a neutered puppy dog or some Justin Trudeau man child,’’ he said. ‘‘It’s pathetic, in my opinion, and I don’t accept it at all. I am not prepared to apologize for being who I am. I don’t think that empathy should preclude critical thinking or basic self-respect.’’
Povey goes on to criticize critiques of ‘‘toxic masculinity,’’ compare current discourses on gender and race to Animal Farm and Nazism, discusses animus toward market-dominant minorities, and ends with some Bob Dylan: ‘‘I ain’t sorry for nothing I’ve done/I’m glad I fought, I only wish we’d won.’’ He at one point uses the word – widely considered a slur – ‘‘retarded.’’
When Johns Hopkins fired him, Povey posted a letter on his web site that included the line, ‘‘White males in this environment seem to be expected to constantly atone for their existence by telegraphing their exclusive concern for every demographic group but their own, like a neutered puppy-dog or some Justin Trudeau man-child.’’
Povey said he knew that writing such a letter could cost him his job with Facebook.
'’Everyone around me was begging me to take it down,’’ Povey wrote on Friday. ‘‘But I said, how can I tell others to man up and then be a coward myself?’’
Povey has been outspoken since being fired from the university, penning a personal essay where he claimed white males are discriminated against on college campuses.
'’White males in this environment seem to be expected to constantly atone for their existence by telegraphing their exclusive concern for every demographic group but their own, like a neutered puppy-dog or some [Canadian Prime Minister] Justin Trudeau man-child,’’ he wrote. ‘‘It’s pathetic, in my opinion, and I don’t accept it at all.’’
The Other Side
The sit-in group met with University administrators to discuss the new police force and the school’s contracts with ICE on July 24, with the next meeting scheduled for Aug. 15.
The Washington Post (August 12th)
The sit-in group met with university administrators on July 24 to discuss the police force and the school’s ICE contracts. University Vice Provost Kevin G. Shollenberger said it was not a negotiation. The next discussion is set for Thursday.
Inside Higher ED (August 12th)
In response to Povey’s statement, the JHU Sit-In group posted video of the incident. (Povey has since said it is misleadingly captioned. The video itself is grainy and a collection of short clips, so it’s difficult to discern what actually happened. It shows Povey using bolt cutters to break through to protesters and, later, someone getting punched.) An accompanying statement from the group says, ‘‘We are pleased Professor Povey is no longer welcome on campus, as he has negatively affected students and the community.’’ However, it says, ‘‘we are disappointed that Povey continues to defend his actions, shows no remorse, and disparages students based on his perceptions of their identities.’’
In its response, JHU Sit-In wrote that Povey’s words are ‘‘alarmingly reminiscent of those written to justify abhorrent acts of violence, including the recent mass shootings in Dayton and El Paso.’’ The university ‘‘must take a definitive stance against discrimination and violence’’ and JHU Sit-In looks ‘‘forward to seeing the additional measures JHU takes to address the campus culture that fostered these actions.’’