Dealing with unwanted, forced prior review? QT26
by John Bowen, MJE
JEA historically has opposed prior review of student media by school officials.
That opposition continues.
Prior review leads only to control, active censorship and iis the first step toward the spread of fake news and less than complete disinformation.
Students and advisers, though, may have no immediate choice but to be under prior review by school officials.
The question then becomes what might the Scholastic Press Rights Committee recommend for consideration until adviser and students, and maybe school officials, create a way to trust and empower student decision-making and civic engagement as designated public forums.
Consider these possibilities:
As journalism teachers we know our students learn more when they make content choices. Prior review and restraint do not teach students to produce higher quality journalism or to become more journalistically responsible.
As journalism teachers we know the only way to teach students to take responsibility for their decisions is to train them and for that responsibility.
As journalism teachers we know democracy depends on students who understand all voices have a right to be heard and have a voice in their school and community.
Thus, to help students achieve professional standards, journalism educators should consider the following process:
- Encourage transparency about who determines the content of a student publication by alerting readers and viewers when student media are subject to prior review and restraint;
- Advocate for the educational benefits of student press freedom if student media are subject to prior review or restraint;
- Provide students with access to sources of professional advice outside the school for issues they need to address;
- Attempt to follow and support JEA’s Adviser Code of Ethics;
- Provide students with tools that include adequate knowledge and resources to successfully carry out their work. By using these tools, students build trust in the learning process and the theories on which it is based;
- Encourage students to seek multiple points of view and to explore a variety of credible sources in their reporting and decision-making;
- Coach instead of making decisions, modeli the value of the learning process and demonstrate the trust we place in our educational system;
- Empower students to understand what journalistic responsibility requires and how to achieve credible journalism where prior review and restraint are not necessary;
- Model a professional newsroom atmosphere where students share in and take responsibility for their work. In so doing, scholastic journalists increase dialogue and help ensure civic engagement;
- Use peer editing to encourage student interaction, analysis and problem solving;
- Instruct students about civic engagement and journalism’s role in maintaining and protecting our democratic heritage;
- Showcase student media where the dissemination of information is unfiltered by prior review and restraint so the school’s various communities receive accurate, truthful and complete information.
While we know advisers will make decisions regarding prior review and other educational issues based on what they believe they can support philosophically, the SPRC reiterates its strong rejection of prior review, and hence prior restraint, as tools in the educational process.
Even though we offer tQuick Tip below as a temporary measure for those who face prior review or have no choice about prior review, this process is not a pathway to building stronger student media and ultimately more engaged citizens.
Quick Tips: When prior review is your only choice
Guideline: While students and advisers, who have to operate under prior review, work toward changing that situation, they should also believe in, and support, those who practice journalism as a designated public forum.
Question: What policies should you negotiate when you are stuck with prior review?
Key points/action: JEA historically has – and does – oppose prior review by school officials. It is an unacceptable practice with no educational value. Prior review only leads to control, active censorship and the first steps toward fake news and less than complete disinformation.
It is possible, though, students and advisers have no immediate choice but to be under prior review by school officials.
The question then becomes what the SPRC would recommend until adviser, students and school officials, provide all involved (students, advisers, faculty, administrators, school board and communities) with a better learning environment than prior review.
Stance: While students and advisers work toward a no prior review goal, we would suggest these steps toward an alternative:
- Student media are identified and practice as designated public forums for student expression where student editors and staff make all final decisions of content.
- Before publishing or posting pages/broadcast/web materials, administrators have the length of a school day (the day they are given materials) to review content and to ask questions. Materials should be given in a timely manner.
- All content must return to students’ hands at the end of the day, on schedule, for publication.
- If administrators/school officials have questions, they may request meeting time within that day, which will not delay publication.
- School officials may comment, ask questions or request changes.
- All final decisions remain with the student journalists as they meet their deadlines. They can choose to heed school officials requests or suggestions or go with content as it was.
Reasoning/suggestions: If review is to help students learn and to identify areas of administrative concern rather than content control, this process should provide adequate opportunity for discussion and collaboration – and keep the journalistic process on track.
Student critical thinking, decision-making and application of learning objectives across the school’s mission remain intact, creating time for a more permanent forum practice to be forged.
Resources: SPRC
• JEA’s Adviser Code of Ethics
Related: These points and other decisions about mission statement, forum status and editorial policy should be part of a Foundations Package that protects journalistically responsible student expression.
Read More
Responsibility in scholastic media starts with
ethics, accuracy, complete story QT23
Administrators may want student media that depicts the school in a positive light, that promotes good news and overlooks the negative.
Is this responsible journalism?
Advisers may want student media that reflects students’ technical proficiency such as mechanics, grammar and style. Little else matters.
Is this responsible journalism?
Students may want to preserve tradition, give students the content they want, focusing on predictable content sure to avoid administrative displeasure.
Is this responsible journalism?
The goal of responsible, ethical journalism is not met by simply deciding stories cannot be published or media practices that produce no educational value. Journalistic responsibility is a layered, textured process.
Resolution of content issues will not come from a series of “don’ts” framed for the students.
Resolution will come through thorough, accurate and credible journalism shaped by a strong mission statement, empowering policies and a staff manual rooted in ethical guidelines that enable student growth, critical thinking and decision-making.
Resolution is not created by publishing fake news forged by censorship and fear of censorship.
Strong journalism is rooted in ethics, empowered by trust and enabled by policies and guidelines that demand responsibility.
Journalistic responsibility.
Quick Tips: Journalistic responsibility
Question: What we speak of responsible journalism, what do we mean?
Key points/action: Responsible journalism is ethical journalism. Administrators demand responsibility but the trouble is groups define it differently.
Responsible and ethical journalism is accurate, complete and cohesive. It’s credible and has integrity.
These elements combined create a path to ethical journalism. The path is much more difficult, if not impossible, censorship, prior review or self-censorship because students are intimidated from carrying out responsible journalism, exist
Journalism that is censored, incomplete and lacks context is not responsible. It’s fake news.
Stance: Journalistic responsibility begins with empowering student media to practice the little things:
- Access to accurate, complete and truthful information
- Ability to present information in context
- Access to credible and trustworthy sources through interviewing, observation and research
- Leadership through their content, decisions and actions
- Opportunities to decide all content for student media, to apply the principles, skills and practices they are taught and learn from their successes
As student journalists take these steps, they will maintain the idea of free expression as democracy’s cornerstone,
Reasoning/suggestions:
Common threads of responsible journalism connect school officials, student journalists and news-media professionals. Guidelines expressed here reflect the belief student journalists and school officials share a commitment to the schools’ educational mission and practices, and that commitment focuses on building stronger and engaged citizens.
Responsible student journalists accept ethical guidelines and practices to best serve their communities. Responsible administrators embrace and enhance journalistic practices that carry out the mission of scholastic media and of the school in fortifying information their communities need to make informed decisions and action in a working democracy.
To that end, we build goals for journalistic responsibility by:
- Establishing policies and practices that enable thorough, accurate, complete and cohesive reporting of student-decided content.
- Applying critical thinking and decision-making skills and practices to assist students as they become productive citizens in a democracy.
- Empowering advisers’ development and use of substantive journalism curricula and application experiences.
- Maintaining open lines of communication between students, faculty and staff, administrators and communities designed to build trust create a maximum environment for truthful and complete sharing of information.
- Reporting accurately, thoroughly, credibly and cohesively so process and product model integrity.
- Operating student media that publish information in verbal and visual context that enhances comprehension for the greater good of all communities.
Related: These points and other decisions about mission statement, forum status and editorial policy should be part of a Foundations Package that protects journalistically responsible student expression.
Read More
Empowering student decision-making QT22
The role of the adviser in student-run media incorporates teacher, coach, counselor, listener and devil’s advocate but not doer. We like the JEA Adviser Code of Ethics as guides for advisers.
That role means letting students make all decisions including content, context and grammar.
One way advisers can help this process is by having a staff manual inclusive of the student media mission statement, policies, guidelines and procedures. The mission statement outlines the overall aim of the student media. Policies are either the board-level or media-level and state the functionality of the student press. Guidelines are the ethical components the student media will work with. The procedures and resources for students to learn how to do something.
Guideline:
As per the board-level or media-level policy, students should be empowered to make all content decisions for student media.
Social media post/question:
What do you do in the instance of who should make the content decisions?
Stance:
Students learn best when they are empowered to make their own decisions with support from the adviser on the sideline. A clear understanding of the adviser’s role helps students take ownership of their work and the program overall.
Reasoning/suggestions:
Students should be empowered to make all content decisions for student media. Instead of making the decisions, advisers should advise and ask questions to help the students examine the issue from multiple perspectives and concerns.
One way advisers can help this process is by having a staff manual inclusive of the student media mission statement, policies, guidelines and procedures. The mission statement outlines the overall aim of the student media. Policies are either the board-level or media-level and act as a constitution for the student press. Guidelines are the ethical components the student media will work with. The procedures and resources for students to learn how to do something.
If students know (or can look at what to do) what By already establishing these prior to a problem happening, it’s easier to see what to do when something does happen. (And, it will.) These policies, guidelines and procedures should function as a reference and be complete (preferably) prior to the problem happening. This helps the students (and adviser) work through issues if they do happen.
Resources:
Female High School Students Bear the Burden of Censorship, SPLC
Curing Hazelwood package, SPRC
The Role of Student Media: Foundations Package, SPRC
SPLC resources, SPLC
Read More
Disturbing images: public’s right to know
vs. invasion of privacy QT18
A 9-year-old girl, burning from napalm, runs naked down a Vietnam road. A vulture watches a Sudanese child, emaciated from famine, crawl across the ground. Two yellow-clad health workers carry a limp 8-year-old boy who might be infected with Ebola to a treatment facility.
What do these images have in common? They are all extremely disturbing, and they all won Pulitzer Prizes.
While high school journalists are unlikely to encounter these extreme conditions of war, famine and disease, they do need to think about the ethics behind publishing disturbing images. When does the public’s right to know — and the potential benefit of exposing these tragedies — outweigh the emotional harm these images might have on the people in the photographs and those who love them?
If the images are taken in a public space, there’s no question the photographers have the legal right to publish. But, as we often tell our students, just because you can publish doesn’t mean you always should.
The highest ethical responsibility for a journalist is to seek truth and report it, but journalists must also consider the responsibility to minimize harm.
[pullquote]When does the public’s right to know — and the potential benefit of exposing these tragedies — outweigh the emotional harm these images might have on the people in the photographs and those who love them?[/pullquote]
The answer isn’t for editors to set up a set list of what kind of images should or should not be published, but rather to develop an ethical process to help them work through the benefits and drawbacks of publishing a disturbing photograph.
When constructing a process for determining whether to publish an image, students should consider many questions, including:
- Is this image important and relevant to the story? Is the image merely explotive/sensational, or does it have news value?
- What makes it meaningful?
- Will the audience understand the information conveyed without reading any accompanying text?
- What story does it tell?
- What story would others be able to get from that photo?
- What impact will publishing this photograph have on the people in the image or on those people’s loved ones?
- What impact will it have on the news consumer? Does the public’s right to know outweigh any emotional harm to the subject or the subject’s loved ones?
- What, if any, warnings should accompany online content?
- How would they defend the decision to run the image to others, including stakeholders and those directly impacted by the image?
- Is there an alternative, better, way to show the story?
Advisers may want to set up hypothetical situations to allow students to practice this ethical process. Here are some scenarios to spark debate:
- During a soccer game, a student falls and breaks her leg. The photographer gets a series of pictures of the accident, including one that shows graphically the severity of the break with bone protruding and another that shows a close up of her face, covered in dirt and tears, as paramedics rush onto the field. In an article about the injury, should the editors publish one of these images? If so, which one?
- A student comes to the Prom very drunk and ends up starting a fight. The photographer has a several pictures of the flight, including ones from when the police arrived. In an article about the fight, should the editors publish one of these images? Why or why not?
- The worst happens — a student brings a gun to school and opens fire. Though, no one is killed before the shooter is contained, two students are injured. One of the reporters had a camera nearby and got the following pictures: a picture of the campus police officer running toward the shooter, a picture of one of the victims bleeding on the ground, and a picture of the shooter being handcuffed. In an article about the event, should the editors publish one of these images? If so, which one?
Guideline: Students should consider not only the news value of an image but also the emotional effect of the image on the audience. They should balance the public’s right to know with the privacy of the people in the image and their loved ones when considering publication of disturbing photos.
Social Media Question: Disturbing photos give powerful insights into tragedy but can be exploitive. How can we balance public’s right to know with potential harm?
Reasoning/suggestions:
Determining whether or not a disturbing photograph should be published requires a deliberate, ethical conversation among student editors. Once editors determine the image is not a legal invasion of privacy — taken in a private space where the subject had a reasonable expectation of privacy — they need to consider the ethics of publishing the image.
When constructing a process for determining whether to publish an image, students should consider many questions, including:
- Is this image important and relevant to the story? Is the image merely explotive/sensational, or does it have news value?
- What makes it meaningful?
- Will the audience understand the information conveyed without reading any accompanying text?
- What story does it tell?
- What story would others be able to get from that photo?
- What impact will publishing this photograph have on the people in the image or on those people’s loved ones?
- What impact will it have on the news consumer? Does the public’s right to know outweigh any emotional harm to the subject or the subject’s loved ones?
- What, if any, warnings should accompany online content?
- How would they defend the decision to run the image to others, including stakeholders and those directly impacted by the image?
- Is there an alternative, better, way to show the story?
Resources:
Presentation Slideshow: Photo Ethics: Disturbing Images, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Ethics, Dignity and Responsibility in Visual Journalism, Jason Tanner, Human Rights for Journalism
Visual ethics guidelines, Principal’s Guide to Scholastic Journalism
Visual Journalism, NPR Code of Ethics
Pulitzer Prize Photographs Gallery, Newseum
Lesson: To Print or Not to Print, Journalism Education Association
Lesson: When Journalists Err Ethically, Journalism Education Association
Lesson: With Freedom of the Press Comes Great Responsibility, Journalism Education Association
SPJ Code of Ethics, Society of Professional Journalists
NPPA Code of Ethics, National Press Photographers Association
Photojournalism ethics needs a reexamination, The Poynter Institute
Visual ethical guidelines join online, yearbook ethics, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Audio: Using Images from Social Media, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee Press Rights Minute
Read MoreWhat we learn by covering tragedy
by Lori Keekley
When I first signed up for this week’s blog, I was excited to write because it’s Banned Books Week.
However, I scrapped that plan Monday when I learned about the shootings in Las Vegas. So, instead of my original plan of blogging about overt censorship, I’m working to help students learn to not self-censor their coverage concerning the Las Vegas shootings.
While the students and I have talked about the coverage of state gun ownership and gun laws, where legislators stand, what students think and the impact on our school and community, I can’t help but think about the other coverage I’ve seen.
We’ve looked through Columbia Journalism Review’s digest of the coverage during the past two days to see how we’re approaching the topic. The students are tracking down every person rumored to have someone who they know there.
They are also examining how gun violence has impacted their community after a workplace shooting that involved the parent of a student who attended our school. What conversation did it forward then … what is it now? Has it sparked activism? Has it incited more calls for Second Amendment protections?
But it’s more than that.
This weekend I finished “The Hate U Give,” by Angie Thomas. Since then, the main character has remained with me, and I can’t stop thinking about the gun violence she experienced while growing up in a poor black neighborhood.
We have students where I teach who also have been impacted by gun violence. Instead of self-censoring or being afraid of covering this, I will continue to encourage my students to cover the students and staff of St. Louis Park High School. By showing their stories, their fears and their views, we robustly cover our student body, which is our main goal.
This week has left me, like many others, with many more questions than answers — many of which will never have answers.
Read MoreCovering controversy QT17
Journalism is not public relations.
Although some administrators would like for students to only publish “positive” stories, a journalist’s job is to watch and report on the school. This may involve students including stories that might make the school “look bad.”
When students cover stories, such as a drastic dip in standardized test scores, the science lab catching on fire or the cost of a new stadium, it informs the public on topics of importance. If student journalists are not covering these topic, who will?
We must, as educators, help students navigate how to include potentially controversial coverage and how to handle the ethical and legal points that arise. We also need to help them find resources for their questions, such as the Student Press Law Center.
Also of importance, students who participate in high school journalism are more likely to be civically engages as adults. School mission statements often cite the importance of “creating future leaders,” “producing critical thinkers,” and even “empowering others to respond to the real issues of the nation and community.”
By students evaluating whether or not to cover a potentially controversial topic, like gun control and not standing for the pledge, they begin to see how they can educate, impact, evaluate and interact with the world around them.
Guideline:
Because journalism differs from public relations, student media should strive to cover real and relevant content importance to the school and community. When controversial issues arise, as they have lately, students should not self-censor.
Instead, they should evaluate the content journalistically and evaluate the importance the information is to the reader. During this evaluation, students should take into consideration journalism legal standards, availability of sources, verification information, timeliness, and the the ethical ramifications of including the controversial coverage.
Social media post/question: Including potentially controversial coverage like gun control and kneeling during the pledge can create challenges, but important topics are worth the risk.
Stance: Students should not shy away from potentially controversial coverage just because it might ruffle some feathers. They do, however, need to be journalistically responsible in their approach and coverage.
Reasoning/suggestions: Journalism is not public relations. Although some administrators would like for students to only publish “positive” stories, a journalist’s job is to watch and report on the school and on sensitive issues. While some of this content may be positive in nature, conflict will happen. We must, as educators, help students navigate how to include potentially controversial coverage and the ethical and legal points that arise. We also need to help them find resources, such as the Student Press Law Center, for their questions.
Resources:
SPLC.org
10 Ethical questions to ask The Pointer Institute
Covering controversy, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
News vs. Public Relations Lesson
Handling Controversy, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Practice Sensitivity in Your Reporting, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Sensitive Issues Guide, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Tips for Covering Controversial Subjects, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Reporting Controversy Requires Establishing a Sound Process, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Don’t Be a Fool, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Verification Before Publication Prevents Many Issues, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Read More