Tom Palley recently circulated two blog posts discussing the temporary suspension of his posting rights on the PKES mailing list, here and here. These have been shared and reposted on several platforms, in some cases with additional editorialising, for example, here.
These posts generated a substantial volume of email traffic, both on the mailing list and privately to the Committee. PKES issued a short response to the first of these posts. Following the circulation of Palley's second post and the reaction it generated, we feel further clarification is needed.
PKES administers a members' mailing list according to the policy published on our website (as of June 5 2025):
The PKES mailing list is intended primarily as an economics-related announcement list for workshops, academic events, jobs etc. When replying to a post, please consider whether you want to reply to the entire list or only to the person who sent the announcement. Since we aim to maintain a moderate traffic list, members are encouraged to continue extended discussions outside the list. Members who consistently use this list for other purposes will have their posting privileges removed.
Anyone may sign up to receive messages from the list, but posting rights are reserved for members; all members have full and unrestricted posting rights so long as they adhere to the guidance above.
PKES is an academic organisation. The purpose of the mailing list is to share announcements directly relevant to our academic work or our roles as academics. The provision of a reliable channel for academics to share relevant information is an important public good. The PKES list is administered on a voluntary unremunerated basis by people with a high workload and, for several, caring commitments. Academic inboxes see a lot of traffic; lists with high traffic or an excess of posts unrelated to academic activity do not retain subscribers. A key principle is therefore to minimise traffic and ensure posting rights are used in accordance with the stated purpose of the list. This requires us to moderate what is posted on the list. Whenever there is a surge of reply-all traffic, it leads to an outflow of people from the list as well as additional work for the Committee.
Working papers – papers that could reasonably be expected to be published in an academic journal – can be announced on the list. Blog posts, op-eds, and other self-published materials should not be posted, except in cases where they promote academic events, translate academic research for non-specialist audiences, or contain information or action points relevant for academics. Palley has repeatedly shared blog posts detailing his opinions on foreign policy; these posts are not consistent with the academic nature of the PKES list.
The mailing list policy discourages reply-all responses, but some topics, such as those covered in Palley’s posts, nonetheless generate substantial on-list reactions as well as responses directed to the Committee. Another widely subscribed heterodox economics list has switched to full moderation – manual approval of all posts – as a direct result of the reaction triggered by Palley’s posts. It would be a great shame if the PKES list succumbed to the same fate, and unrestricted posting rights for members were revoked.
It is on the basis of these principles that many of Palley's posts since 2022 have been deemed in breach of the mailing list policy: these are non-academic blog posts expressing opinions about foreign policy that generate a substantial volume of response, much of it confrontational.
When our policy is breached, we first reach out privately and ask members to adhere to the policy. We have done this on several occasions over the past few years – not only with Palley but with other members. We also sometimes post reminders of the policy to the full list when we perceive that breaches have occurred or boundaries are being tested. Unfortunately, despite our requests starting in 2022, Palley did not stop announcing his blog posts about foreign policy; we therefore took the decision to suspend him. This is the second time that a three-month suspension has been imposed on Palley. Suspension is only applied after repeated non-compliance. The decision to suspend posting rights is not taken lightly, and is not taken on the basis of individual views or political positions. Instead it is the result of continued non-compliance with longstanding list guidelines, as applied by the Committee.
It should be clear that moderating a narrow-purpose mailing list according to published rules, with the intended purpose of maintaining a clear communication channel for academics to do academic work, is not a breach of freedom of speech. We understand that current global events elicit strong reactions and that some members wish to engage in public debate. There are many appropriate platforms for that purpose. Members are free to set up other mailing lists or use unmoderated social media platforms if they wish to engage in debates or share a wider range of material; disallowing this material on the PKES list is not 'cancellation'. Palley's invocation of Niemöller is inappropriate: it trivialises historical events and misrepresents the context of the moderation decision.
The Committee has been working for several months on an updated list policy with explicit wording on what is permitted. We recognise that there are differences of opinion among PKES members over the purpose and rules of the mailing list (and how these rules should be interpreted). We have also taken notice of the recently shared open letter signed by some PKES members (as well as non-members). To ensure that the updated mailing list policy reflects the views of PKES members, we will therefore shortly circulate the new wording and invite feedback from members. We ask that members wait for this consultation process rather than sharing views about the moderation principles on the mailing list.
The PKES Committee
June 2025