 What is the best description of what the article is doing with Fiss’s book?
What Professor Fiss has to say about it is worth attending to not merely because of his prominence in the field but because his argument is planted in the common assumptive ground of a lot of contemporary academic thought about the bankruptcy of individualism. This is what Fiss means by the "irony" in his title: that true freedom of speech for all requires suppressing the speech of some. Fiss does not avoid it. Fiss' analyses of specific cases are presented against a lightly sketched historical argument.
 Challenging Fiss’s points while unpacking what the book has to say on the whole.
 Taking a neutral approach in order to summarize the book.  Challenging Fiss’s points while unpacking what the book has to say on the whole.  Challenging Fiss’s points while offering better stats and better solutions.  Taking a supportive approach and demonstrating how and where Fiss is especially effective.