FAMU President Marva Johnson last week introduced a new social media policy granting the university broad authority to moderate, restrict, or remove comments critical of her administration on official university accounts—a move critics have labeled an attempt to stifle dissent and mirror tactics often associated with President Donald Trump’s adversarial relationship with the media.
The policy, essentially, designates all university social media channels as “limited public forums” and reserves the right for FAMU to “moderate or block comments” deemed unrelated, defamatory, or biased against the administration. It explicitly allows the university to disable commenting features on posts or archive discussions at its “sole and absolute discretion.”
The move has sparked swift backlash from free speech advocates, alumni, and faculty who see it as an effort to insulate Johnson from criticism amid ongoing scrutiny over her competence to lead a Top 100 Public Research University, and her lackadaisical leadership style.
“This isn’t about maintaining decorum—it’s about controlling the narrative and shutting down legitimate criticism,” said one FAMU faculty member who has requested anonymity. “She’s taking a page right out of the Trump playbook: punish dissent, dismiss critics, and present only the curated version of the truth.”
During the search process, Tallahassee Attorney Chuck Hobbs called Johnson a “MAGA Trojan horse,” pointing to her appointments to state boards by former Gov. Rick Scott and Gov. Ron DeSantis, and questioned her academic credentials.
“Serving on a board does not an educator make,” Hobbs added. Hobbs' sentiment continues to resonate with many in the FAMU community, noting that she had no prior teaching or administrative experience in higher education before her appointment, and was a last minute addition to the list of finalist last year after a contentious and opaque search process.
Her tenure since assuming office has been marked by miscue after miscue--- including entering into a MOU with a New York City college that is on accreditation probation that is deemed as one of the worst higher ed institutions in NY state, efforts to tightly manage public perception, including an aggressive, polished social media strategy aimed at winning over students, alumni, and donors. The new policy formalizes what some critics say has already been an informal practice of suppressing negative commentary.
“It’s deeply concerning to see a public university and institution built on the free exchange of ideas—adopt such an authoritarian approach to communication,” said Casey Frechette, a associate professor of journalism and digital communications at the University of South Florida. “Social media should be a space for engagement, not a place to enforce loyalty.”
A university spokesperson defended the policy as a “standard practice” aimed at maintaining “respectful and relevant dialogue” and ensuring compliance with Florida public records laws.
But similar policies have faced legal challenges elsewhere. Critics argue that designating social media pages as “limited public forums” while selectively silencing critical voices may violate First Amendment protections, particularly when the pages function as key channels for official information.
Johnson’s administration has not shied away from controversy. Shortly after her appointment last year, she faced protests and open letters from alumni and students over her selection and her political ties and background outside academia.
The social media guidelines have further fueled concerns that Johnson is governing with a political, rather than pedagogical, mandate—one that prizes image control over intellectual freedom.
“Public universities are not corporate entities, nor are they propaganda arms of an administration,” said Timothy Gibson, a media ethics scholar at George Mason University. “When you start filtering criticism instead of engaging with it, you undermine the very mission of higher education.”
As FAMU moves forward under its new policy, many are watching to see whether the administration will use these powers sparingly or whether Johnson’s presidency will be defined by the very divisions she seems eager to hide.