Now they're administrators and fund raisers. That may be somewhat harsh, but it is yet more evidence that others have noticed a vacuum. College presidents may be less present to the American public today because they are less present to one another. In the 60's, I spent one weekend every month for six years at meetings of the Carnegie Commission for the Study on the Future of Higher Education, chaired by Clark Kerr. I met frequently with people like Bill Friday of the University of North Carolina, David Henry of the University of Illinois, Nathan Pusey of Harvard University, Jim Perkins of Cornell University, Carl Kaysen of the Institute for Advanced Study, and Katharine McBride of Bryn Mawr College.
Presidents now preside over institutions that have grown much more complex and bureaucratic.
Many presidents are simply too busy to speak out on issues beyond the immediate concerns of their institutions. Getting involved in controversial public issues complicates the already neuralgic life of a college president. It is tough enough to maintain an irenic atmosphere on a campus without inviting criticism for taking stands outside the academy that will inevitably alienate one constituency or another. The 60's and early 70's were contentious times, and college presidents found themselves in the midst of acrimonious and sometimes violent clashes not only over civil rights and the Vietnam War but other societal concerns. In fact, I kept a suit-pocket necrology during the days of the student revolution, noting fellow presidents who were forced from office.