University Hall as pictured in 2017. Credit: Jack Westerheide | Lantern File Photo
A video released Wednesday by a conservative media organization suggests Ohio State is ignoring a state-imposed diversity, equity and inclusion ban, based on an interview of a single Ohio State employee.?
Posted by Accuracy in Media, which conducts undercover interviews and investigations, also known as AIM, the video is meant to draw scrutiny of Ohio State’s compliance with Senate Bill 1. The organization has produced similar videos at multiple universities across the country.
The video drew condemnation from a group representing Ohio State faculty. University spokesperson Ben Johnson said the person interviewed has no influence over university policies and decisions.
“We are aware of the video and are looking into it,” Johnson said. “The individual in the video has no oversight of academics, curriculum or other college programming.”
In the video, an individual affiliated with AIM poses as a parent of a prospective student and secretly records a conversation with Melissa Newhouse, executive administrative assistant to the Office of Dean Erik Porfeli of the College of Education and Human Ecology, about how the university approaches DEI-related programming.
The video shows Newhouse speaking to the supposed parent on how there is still a continuation of DEI-related efforts among university staff.?
“We’re very diverse and [the administrators] are extremely passionate about that, and we are doing what we can,” Newhouse said in the video. “They’re still doing things.”
When confronted later by AIM, Newhouse said “That’s AI. It’s gotta be. That’s not me saying that.”
Senate Bill 1, also referred to as SB 1, is a bill that went into effect on June 27, 2025. It bans diversity, equity and inclusion programming and faculty strikes, per prior Lantern reporting. The bill limits the teaching of controversial topics and requires course syllabi to be public online.?
Multiple changes have been made at Ohio State as SB 1 continues to be implemented across campus.?
Since SB 1 went into effect, Ohio State has made several changes to align with the law, including closing its Office of Diversity and Inclusion, establishing a SB 1 implementation committee, clarifying guidance and requirements in programs, activities and offerings at the university. Ohio State also updated language within websites, scholarship banners, cut some majors and even limited dorm floor decorations.?
According to Ohio State’s SB 1 compliance website, “SB 1 does not restrict the freedom of faculty to teach, conduct research, describe their scholarship or research, publish scholarship or research, share their academic or scholarly expertise or to discuss in classrooms, in their own manner, any material that is relevant to the subject matter within an academic discipline as defined in the course syllabus.”
The release is not the first undercover recording AIM has conducted at universities.
Its website shows recorded footage at other institutions, including Arizona State University, North Carolina State, University of Kentucky, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill among others.
The American Association of University Professors at Ohio State, or AAUP-OSU, criticized AIM’s tactics, calling the recordings deceptive.
“They lied to people, they secretly recorded them, they edited their words, and they still have nothing to suggest that Ohio State University is violating state or federal law,” AAUP-OSU said in an email.?
AAUP said Ohio State “has overcomplied with recent federal and state legislation like SB 1 that limits the free speech of students and academic freedom of faculty.
“We reject AIM’s efforts to chill constitutionally-protected speech about diversity, equity, and inclusion on campus,” the statement said.
Christopher McKnight Nichols, the Woody Hayes Chair in National Security Studies, history professor and board member of AAUP-OSU, said he has concerns of how such events affect the freedom of professors and higher-education teachings.
?“Actions like this remind us of the very real costs of just knowing speech might be recorded and might be used maliciously,” Nichols said. “We have been hearing from faculty, staff, and students that the very possibility of being secretly recorded is stifling speech inside and outside the classroom, all the more of a concern in this fraught political moment.”
