What should go into an editorial policy?
What should not? QT3
Editorial policies are the foundations for your journalism program. Often short, these statements address forum status, who makes final decisions of content and prior review.
Think of it this way: a strong policy is prescriptive. It says what students will do. A policy is like a constitution and sets the legal framework for student media.
We strongly discourage the inclusion of ethical guidelines or procedures and process in policy documents because ethics and staff manual procedures are suggestive. That means topics like byline suggestions, font choices and how to handle unnamed sources should not be same document as policy. Topics, procedures and details do not have the same purpose as policy.
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 and anchors staff manuals.
Question: What should go into an editorial policy? What should not?
Editorial policies are the foundations for your journalism program. Often short, these statements address forum status, who makes final decisions of content and prior review.
We recommend this wording as a basic policy statement: “[NAME OF STUDENT MEDIA] are designated public forums for student expression in which students make all final content decisions without prior review from school officials.”
Other models could include more material and wording to explain the value of student decision-making, historical or educational reasoning.
[pullquote]Quick Tips are small tidbits of information designed to address specific legal or ethical concerns advisers and media staffs may have or have raised. These include a possible guideline, stance, rationale and resources for more information. This is the third in the series[/pullquote]
A guideline is a stance on an ethical topic. A guideline is more open to change by student staff to staff.
Beyond that, SPRC suggested models could include editorial guidelines (although we recommend several as ethical process and procedures) like:
- Role of student media
- Ownership of student content
- Handling death
- Advertising decisions
- Handling letters/comments
- Policy consistently applied across all platforms
A procedure is a way to do something. These might include how students answer the phone in the room or how they check out a camera. Procedures are how students carry out the policy and implement ethical guidelines. All are part of the staff manual but are clearly separated from policy so their roles are clearly distinct.
Stance:
Think of it this way: a strong policy is prescriptive. It says what students will do. A policy is like a constitution and sets the legal framework for student media.
We strongly discourage the inclusion of ethical guidelines or procedures and process from policy documents because ethics and staff manual procedures are suggestive. That means topics like byline suggestions, font choices and how to handle unnamed sources should not be same document as policy. Topics, procedures and details do not have the same purpose as policy.
Resources: The foundations of journalism: policies, ethics and staff manuals
JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
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 MorePrior review v. prior restraint: Quick Tip2
In brief, the Journalism Education Association has found prior review has no educational value. Instead, JEA believes it is simply the first step toward censorship and fake news. Prior review also contributes to self-censorship and lack of trust between students, advisers and administrators. Prior review conflicts with JEA’s adviser code of ethics.
Prior review occurs when anyone not on the publication/media staff requires that he or she be allowed to read, view or approve student material before distribution, airing or publication.
Prior restraint occurs when someone not on the publication/media staff requires pre-distribution changes to or removal of student media content.
Prior review itself is a form of prior restraint. It inevitably leads the reviewer to censor and student journalists to self-censor in an effort to assure approval.
An officially designated adviser, when working with students and offering suggestions for improvement as part of the coaching and learning process, who reads or views student media before publication is not engaged in prior review.
Possible Guideline: Prior review and restraint
Question: What does prior review mean and how is it different from prior restraint?
Key points/action: In brief, the Journalism Education Association has found prior review has no educational value. Instead, JEA believes it is simply the first step toward censorship and fake news. Prior review also contributes to self-censorship and lack of trust between students, advisers and administrators. Prior review conflicts with JEA’s adviser code of ethics.
Stance: JEA would define prior review and restraint as follows:
• Prior review occurs when anyone not on the publication/media staff requires that he or she be allowed to read, view or approve student material before distribution, airing or publication.
[pullquote]Quick Tips are small tidbits of information designed to address specific legal or ethical concerns advisers and media staffs may have or have raised. These include a possible guideline, stance, rationale and resources for more information. This is the second in the series[/pullquote]
- Prior restraint occurs when someone not on the publication/media staff requires pre-distribution changes to or removal of student media content.
- Prior review itself is a form of prior restraint. It inevitably leads the reviewer to censor and student journalists to self-censor in an effort to assure approval.
- An officially designated adviser, when working with students and offering suggestions for improvement as part of the coaching and learning process, who reads or views student media before publication is not engaged in prior review.
When an adviser requires pre-distribution changes over the objections of student editors, his/her actions then become prior restraint
Reasoning/suggestions: Students learn more when they make all publication choices. Prior review and restraint do not teach students to produce higher quality journalism.
The only way to teach students to take responsibility for their decisions is to give them the responsibility to make those decisions freely. No administrator has ever shown any educational value in prior review.
Continued democracy depends on students understanding all voices have a right to be heard and assuring all viewpoints have a say in their communities.
Resources: Questions advisers should ask those who want to implement prior review, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Prior Review, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
SPRC Talking points blog
SPRC Talking points
Definitions of prior review, prior restraint
Lesson: Understanding the perils of prior review and restraint
Why we keep harping about prior review
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.
2017 Constitution Day lessons
Constitution Day 2017 is approaching, and several members of the Scholastic Press Rights Committee have come together to provide you with materials to help your students understand their rights and responsibilities. These lessons provide particular focus on the First Amendment and the freedom of speech in general, but they would be appropriate and effective in any class that touches on issues related to history, the Constitution, citizenship or journalism.
Since Constitution Day (Sept. 17) is on a Sunday this year, we’d suggest celebrating on the following Monday. For a quick preview of this year’s lessons, feel free to watch this video. Links are also provided, below, to the new materials as well as lessons from previous years that might be particularly useful.
This year’s lessons:
First Amendment School Dialogue, by Jeff Kocur: Guide your students through a class-sized (or whole-school) dialogue about the five freedoms of the First Amendment. Students will identify and evaluate the impact of the First Amendment in their own lives and the lives of others.
The Importance of an Independent and Active Press, by Matthew Smith: Expose students to the many possible benefits of independent media in a democracy through quotes and video excerpts of world leaders espousing the necessity of a free press. Students will evaluate and discuss their own reaction to these arguments.
Introduction to News Literacy, by Kristin Taylor: The freedom of speech and of the press come with responsibilities, too, and this lesson provides materials for recognizing different types of news media and coverage. Students will examine the credibility of news sources as well as examine their own media habits in order to beef up their news diets and avoid “fake” news.
What’s in Your State Press Law?, by John Bowen and Lori Keekley: As New Voices laws spread across the country to protect student journalists, help your students understand what their state does or does not cover when it comes to student press rights. Students will examine their own law and create a dialogue with stakeholders about the benefits of protecting student publications.
Sharing Your State Law with Others, by John Bowen and Lori Keekley: State laws protecting student press rights mean nothing if students, administrators, school boards and others don’t know what they mean or how they impact the community. For this lesson, students will create an action plan for the various groups in their community about the state legislation.
Previous lessons:
Materials from previous years are obviously still available and relevant. The links, below, take you to the full list of lessons from each year, but we’ve also provided a quick suggestion of a lesson from that year that might work particularly well with the new batch we created.
2016 (Check out the lesson on exploring and discussing the gray area between political correctness and free speech.)
2015 (Check out the Constitution of the United States Crossword for a quick hit.)
2014 (Check out the lesson asking students to evaluate what to do when people ask them to remove content already published or posted in a student publication.)
2013 (Check out these materials forcing students to evaluate the ethical considerations involved when stories or information could be highly controversial or harmful.)
Feel free to send any feedback or questions to Matthew Smith (matthewssmith17@gmail.com) or Jeff Kocur (jeffreykocur@gmail.com)
Constitution Day Committee
John Bowen, MJE, Kent State University (OH)
Lori Keekley, MJE, St. Louis Park High School (MN)
Jeff Kocur, CJE, Hopkins High School (MN)
Matthew Smith, CJE, Fond du Lac High School (WI)
Kristin Taylor, CJE, The Archer School for Girls (CA)
Read More
What’s in your state press law?
by John Bowen and Lori Keekley
Title
What’s in your state press law?
Description
State laws protecting student press rights mean nothing if students don’t know what they cover. For this lesson, students will examine what their state law protects and what its limitations are. Students will also create a dialogue with stakeholders in order to educate them about what the bill and its impact.
Objectives
- Students will evaluate what their state law covers
- Students will locate and quote from their state bill
- Students will create a dialogue to help inform other stakeholders about the bill.
Common Core State Standards
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.11-12.4 | Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze how an author uses and refines the meaning of a key term or terms over the course of a text (e.g., how Madison defines faction in Federalist No. 10). |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.11-12.8 | Delineate and evaluate the reasoning in seminal U.S. texts, including the application of constitutional principles and use of legal reasoning (e.g., in U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions and dissents) and the premises, purposes, and arguments in works of public advocacy (e.g., The Federalist, presidential addresses). |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.9-10.1.D | Respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives, summarize points of agreement and disagreement, and, when warranted, qualify or justify their own views and understanding and make new connections in light of the evidence and reasoning presented. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1.D | Respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives; synthesize comments, claims, and evidence made on all sides of an issue; resolve contradictions when possible; and determine what additional information or research is required to deepen the investigation or complete the task. |
Length
50 minutes
Materials / resources
State law (pick the applicable one from those available at the end of the lesson)
Handout: State law sheet
Rubric: State law rubric
Computer
Definitions of legal terms used in various bills
Lesson step-by-step
Step 1 — Introduction (5 minutes)
Thirteen states have now passed student free expression legislation or codes. While many are similar, no one is exactly like any other.
Have students guess what 14 states have this legislation or state code.
(Teacher note — the states in which legislation has passed include: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Washington.)
Is your state part of this? (If it is not, have students evaluate one of the other state laws and see Extension 2).
Step 2 — Small groups (20 minutes)
Place students into small groups. Each group will need to complete the “State Law Sheet.” Teachers may need to provide hints about where to find the information either by search or accessing the New Voices USA homepage.
The teacher would also explain why it is important students create a dialogue between a student and either an administrator, school board member, angry parent, angry student or adviser about the bill. The teacher should assign each group one of these people to educate about the significance, relevance and rationale behind the laws, especially as they apply to the stakeholders.
Step 3 — Assessment (25 minutes)
Students will act out the dialogue they created concerning educating someone about the bill. Please see the rubric for point breakdown.
Differentiation
If you have advanced students, you could have students compare their state legislation with another state’s bill. Then they could write a blogpost about whether their legislation needs any changes and why.
We also recommend more than additional class or assignment time for students to work on applying what they learned about their state legislation.
Assessment
The teacher will use the assessment form to evaluate student participation.
Extension Activities
Extension 1:
Have students (in small groups) research the following court cases and reflect upon why they might be used as precedent in a New Voices law:
Tinker v. Des Moines
Bethel v. Fraser
Dean v. Utica
Miller v. California
Morse v. Frederick
The students should present background information about why the court cases laws are relevant and why precise legal language is essential for any such legislation to succeed.
Extension 2:
If your state is not included in the list of 14 states with laws, the teacher might have students use the lesson to focus on differences between two of the state’s legislation is and what should be in students’ state legislation when developed.
Students could also access the New Voices U.S. site and see their state’s status in the New Voices movement and see who to contact if they are interested in helping to pass the bill.
State Laws and Codes:
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Illinois
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Nevada
- North Dakota
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- Washington
Forum status of student media: Quick Tip1
Policy
If you’re developing a new policy, the Scholastic Press Rights Committee recommends using language something like this:
[Name of publication] is a designated public forum for student expression. Student editors make all content decisions without prior review from school officials.
Key points/action: In the post-Hazelwood world, it is more important than ever for student journalists and their advisers to know what policies their school has adopted relating to student publications or student expression.
[pullquote]Quick Tips are small tidbits of information designed to address specific legal or ethical concerns advisers and media staffs may have or have raised. These include a possible guideline, stance, rationale and resources for more information. This is the first in the series. [/pullquote]
The language of those policies (whether they give editorial control to students or keep it in the hands of school officials) and the amount of freedom that students have traditionally operated under at the school can determine whether Hazelwood or Tinker sets the standard for what school officials will be allowed to censor.
A designated public forum is created when school officials have “by policy or by practice” opened a publication for use by students to engage in their own free expression.
Often the most important question in that analysis is which of two First Amendment standards they have to meet.
- The Tinker standard (as defined by the case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)), which says schools can censor only if their actions are necessary to avoid a material and substantial disruption of school activities or an invasion of the rights of others. This language may sound vague, but as the courts have interpreted it, the Tinker standard is a very difficult one for school officials to meet and typically requires them to show evidence of physical disruption before their censorship will be allowed.
- The Hazelwood standard (as defined by the case Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988)), which says schools can censor if their actions are reasonably related to legitimate educational concerns. Although this standard requires school officials to justify every act of censorship as educationally sound, it is a standard that gives school officials more extensive authority to silence or punish student expression.
Stance: Of the three types of forums, open public, limited public and closed, JEA strongly endorses the designated (open) public forum concept.
In the Hazelwood case, the Court said it believed both the policy and practice at Hazelwood East High School reflected school officials’ intent to exercise complete control over the student newspaper’s content. That finding prompted the Court to say a designated public forum did not exist.
Student publications at other schools with different policies and different practices relating to editorial control can be public forums. Where student editors have been given final authority over content decisions in their publications or where a school policy explicitly describes a student publication as a designated public forum, the Tinker standard will still apply.
Reasoning/suggestions: If you’re developing a new policy, the Scholastic Press Rights Committee recommends using language something like this:
[Name of publication] is a designated public forum for student expression. Student editors make all content decisions without prior review from school officials.
Two things are important about the phrasing of this policy statement. First is the use of the words “designated public forum” as opposed to “limited public forum” or other similar language. Although many once believed the two phrases were interchangeable, some recent court decisions have suggested that using the word “limited” opens the door to school censorship as permitted under Hazelwood.
Second, using the phrase “student editors make all content decisions” is in many ways a clearer restatement of the meaning of “designated public forum.” It conveys the intent behind the public forum phrase anyone unfamiliar with the relevant Supreme Court rulings should understand.
To help schools understand what we consider public forums, please note these definitions:
- Forums by policy: An official school policy exists that designates student editors as the ultimate authority regarding content. School officials actually practice this policy by exercising a “hands-off” role and empowering student editors to lead. Advisers teach and offer students advice, but they neither control nor make final decisions regarding content.
- Forums by practice: A school policy may or may not exist regarding student media, but administrators have a “hands-off” approach and have empowered students to control content decisions. Advisers teach and offer students advice, but they neither control nor make final decisions regarding content.
Resources
When your publication is a public forum and when it is not, Mark Goodman, Knight chair in Scholastic Journalism
Choosing your forum status is like choosing the best medicine, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Read More
Censored news is fake news
Censored news is fake news.
Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, wrote that in Fake News, Real Solutions recently. He said the first wave of responses to fake news does not cure the underlying problem.
We agree wholeheartedly.
LoMonte blamed part of the problem on an educational system that tells students across the country to “publish only news that flatters government officials and reflects favorably on government policies.”
Censored news is fake news.
Such censored news at least partly stems from the 1988 U.S. Supreme Court’s Hazelwood decision.
LoMonte suggested the way to fight the fake news epidemic is to ensure educational institutions inoculate their students and don’t spread the virus.
That inoculation comes from more freedom, not less; more journalistic responsibility, not less; and from solid practice of ethical journalism.
As journalism groups strive to fight fake news in many ways, let’s begin in our schools by identifying at least four types of fake news:
• Information meant to deceive
• Information generated through sloppy and incomplete reporting
• Information not clearly identified as sponsored news
• Information spread by censored media
Follow JEA’s Scholastic Press Rights Committee and others over the next several months as we examine the issue of fake news, identify the problems it creates and seek solutions so scholastic journalism can lead in the fight against fake news and its impact.
Noteable resources:
• Evaluating information: The cornerstone of civic online reasoning
• Students have ‘dismaying’ inability to tell fake news from real, study shows
• A guide to spotting fake news
• The dangers of crying wolf with ‘post-truth’
• How to spot fake news
• A savvy news consumer’s guide: How not to get duped
• Many Americans believe fake news is sowing confusion
Read More