Fighting the chilling effects of censorship leads to students funding own outside school paper
by Liz Palmer
Hazelwood stories: Six years ago we began teaching journalism as a husband-wife team at duPont Manual High School’s communications magnet program in Louisville, Kentucky.
Around the same time, one of the assistant principals became principal. Manual is the city’s highest profile and most competitive magnet school, and it puts the principal under considerable public pressure.
The yearbook the students produced during our principal’s first year ran a spread about Manual’s changing attitudes toward LGBT students. Quoted in the article were students who self-identified as LGBT and long-time teachers who had witnessed the mood shift.
Kentucky isn’t known as a progressive state, but our school and its culture is a well-known exception to the rule. The students quoted were out to their friends, acquaintances, classmates, and families … and after the yearbook was published, the principal, who had received an advance copy, did not want the spread in the yearbook at all, even if the students were anonymous. Liz, as the adviser, and Jamie, as the department chair, had reviewed the spread prior to publication and thought it was appropriate.
The principal ordered us to tell the students to remove the spread or cut it out ourselves. It was clear our jobs were on the line, but we did not feel we could ask the students to cut out the spread. Regardless, the editors sliced 1200 spreads out of the yearbook with Xacto knives out of concern we would be fired.
Since then, the principal has practiced prior review in all of our school’s publications. He cites the Hazelwood decision when he believes content will be “disruptive.”
The practice frequently has a chilling effect on the students’ editorial decisions, as they don’t want to put time into a story only to have the principal censor it, and rarely do students (and parents) embrace the idea of a battle with the administration.
In particular, they know the administration wants them to avoid LGBT issues and stories that would supposedly compromise the positive image of the school. We see few stories proposed with this sort of content.
A few students and their families did decide to make public their objections to the school’s censorship. Manual made international headlines when a teacher had an affair with a student, but when a student reporter asked the principal for an interview, the principal told him he could not publish anything but a brief, principal-authored statement that she “resigned” on the student-run news website.
The local media caught wind of the story’s censorship, and one of the student reporters agreed to be interviewed on camera at his home.
On another occasion, student reporters planned another yearbook story about the issue of transgendered students in the school. The principal exercised prior restraint, and the students responded by making their own publication without school funds or an adviser’s input.
Their publication, the Red Pen, was a hot item in the school and resulted in the students winning the Courage in Student Journalism Award from the Student Press Law Center.
Earlier, in 2012, issue two came out and we’ve heard the administration confiscated copies from students distributing them before school.
Hazelwood is a constant source of confusion for students and administrators about where their rights begin and end, about who should be accountable, and about the correct role for teachers, students and administrators in the student press.
Liz Palmer is is Magnet Coordinator for Journalism and Communication and director of Young Writers Workshop at duPont Manual High School, Louisville, Kentucky.
Read More
California ed codes protect student expression, adviser teaching
by Casey Nichols
Hazelwood stories: I live and teach in a state protected from the Hazelwood decision by a carefully crafted California Education Code. And yet, periodically it rears its ugly head.
In the past 19 years since I’ve advised at Rocklin High School, in both yearbook and newspaper, a parent will on occasion take exception to something we’ve published. They will do an Internet research, and then cite Hazelwood as a reason “I” need to edit the students. I reply with a link to California Ed Code 48907 as a starter, and proceed to explain how this superseded the Hazelwood decision and protects student expression across the board.
Each time my school has had a change of principals I spend time educating them on state law (and our board policy). Fortunately, three of the four have understood the value in freedom of expression. We also develop an understanding of what education code means by an adviser’s role in assuring the highest possible quality in reporting and mechanics.
I have often thought of setting those high expectations often as we approach potentially controversial areas. While in graduate school I actually met the student’s and lawyer who defended the case. I remember how much it offended their sense of right and wrong to have their work censored. It reminds me that as a teacher I must expect excellence and thorough reporting; as an adviser I must my students, and have their back when they’ve done their job and still get questioned.
I am further proud that California has gone on to protect adviser’s jobs with SB 1370, which guarantees they cannot be removed for protecting student’s rights of expression. There is little more dear to all of us than our First Amendment Rights, and as it is so often, high school journalism is the perfect laboratory to learn, practice, and master effective use of those rights.
Read MoreTweet11: Approach controversy with confidence, professionalism
Don’t self-censor. Learn how to approach controversial stories with confidence and professionalism. #25HZLWD
http://www.jeasprc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/SPRC-Standard-7-controv2.pdf
Sometimes, being a student journalist means going head-to-head with others over stories that make people—even those on your staff—uncomfortable. Often, students are incredibly thoughtful and sensitive toward what stories might create tension or even generate real scrutiny of a person or process in their school.
Feeling wary about a story, and about what could happen if you publish that story, is a completely normal reaction. But it’s important to remember that having caution and sensitivity towards a subject doesn’t mean you should drop the story completely. Professional news media cover sensitive topics on a daily basis, and figuring out how to do this is one of the most important lessons student journalists can learn.
When you are faced with covering a difficult or sensitive story, take the time to consider all your options, discuss the ethical implications and ask important legal questions. You CAN approach controversial stories with professionalism, but it takes time and effort, and willingness on your part not to self-censor the tough stuff.
Read MoreHazelwood made some better teachers, journalists; others suffered from fear
by Nancy Hastings
Hazelwood stories: It’s hard to believe that it’s been 25 years since the Hazelwood decision came in…. it seems like only last week when the phone calls poured in from local media and area high schools asking for my opinions on what this would mean and my help to defend student rights from administrators already trying to clamp the voice of criticism.
I always thanked my lucky stars that I worked in a school district and community that supported our student media. While we didn’t always agree, the administration believed in us to act responsibly. In fact, my principal used to tell me that he’d rather answer questions from student journalists than the local media, because at least the students quoted him accurately.
I do think Hazelwood made us better journalists. We still tackled stories that mattered, but we became more conscious of the need to cover all sides of the story as accurately as possible. The students became better critical thinkers as they debated issues and backed up their beliefs. The decision encouraged more open communication as editors scheduled regular meetings with administrators to discuss subjects that mattered to both sides. In fact, they often invited the principal to attend Editorial Board meetings when the staff had concerns they wanted to discuss.
I think Hazelwood in some ways made me a better teacher. I started teaching in the Tinker era when… “students nor teachers shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gates.” I could no longer take those rights for granted. I had to fully understand student press law and ethics, so that my students could decipher their rights and responsibilities. These students in turn, used that knowledge to help educate each new young administrator who believed students had no rights to criticize any school decision or activity. As students became more proficient in understanding the pedagogical mission of schools, they became more confident as reporters and writers.
Unfortunately, not all student journalists have been so lucky. Area administrators have confiscated newspapers that criticized a coach, have shut down a publication that called for the school library to be open longer after hours to allow students to research, and set have set up prior review because student journalists criticized school policies. New advisers with little journalism background have become controlled PR tools of their administrations, fearful of covering anything that matters. So many staffs self-censored themselves, knowing someone is watching over their shoulders.
I remember that cold January day as if it were last week. Many journalism programs have thrived on the strength of a responsible student voice. Unfortunately many more have suffered under the misconceptions of the Hazelwood decision.
Read MoreScholastic journalism enhances critical thinking, exploration and leadership;
Hazelwood promotes none of it
by Bob Button
Hazelwood stories: The Supreme Court decision in Hazelwood is arguably the worst blow to scholastic journalism in our lifetime – primarily because it struck a hammer in favor of control and against education in America’s schools.
Having grown up in an era when student newspapers were seen as PR tools for the school, when I moved to Grosse Pointe, Michigan, for a full-time journalism position, I asked my new principal in our first meeting what the guidelines were for what could and could not be printed. He looked at me and said, “I thought that was why we hired you!” That was in the late ‘60s, just as students were beginning to challenge everything.
What followed was a career supporting students as they explored topics of interest or importance in their lives – even if they were potentially controversial – and encouraging students to cover subjects in depth or take a stance in editorials or columns with a full understanding of the issues involved. That is critical thinking at its best and it promotes leadership. Never did an administrator tell us we could not cover a subject, even if it put the school in a poor light. But with freedom comes responsibility. We made some mistakes, which led to one of the first staff-written editorial policies in the country, putting in writing the student editorial board’s responsibility for serving the newspaper’s readers.
Students cannot learn critical thinking if that thinking is limited arbitrarily. Students cannot learn responsibility or leadership if they have no freedom to make decisions.
Too many principals then and now think they teach responsibility when they exercise control. They do not. They simply relieve students of responsibility. When students have no control, they respond either by acquiescence to the demands of those in power or by challenging the power in some other way. Neither is a desirable outcome.
With the Supreme Court decision in Hazelwood, many principals simply maintained the control they had always exercised, or established control they had relinquished under Tinker. My principal didn’t change a thing. Hazelwood does not mandate control – it permits it – and my principal was more interested in education than in control. But in the 25 years since Hazelwood we have a whole generation of administrators who see control as their first priority, of teachers forced to be concerned first and foremost with test scores, of students who think of school newspapers as an exercise in innocuous comment.
Sure, there are wonderful administrators, great teachers and challenging students fighting the good fight. But Hazelwood promotes none of it.
Read MoreTweet9: Establish a network of support
Establish a network of alumni and parents to support you. Create allies for when trouble arises. #25HZLWD http://jeasprc.org/reaching-out-informing-the-community-about-key-principles-of-journalism/
You never know when you could use a friend or two or 10 or more. There are lots of good reasons to have a parent and alumni booster group — they bring food to late work nights, raise money to help defray costs for going to conventions and act as chaperones on field trips.
BUT if you need someone to support you and speak up for the value of what you do, stand up for your right to use your voices or to have a publications class, those booster club members know how hard you work and what your media mean to you. They’ll be there for something more important than bringing pizza to you at 10 p.m.
The rest of the school community might know more about you, too, if you have an active j club that has activities and projects that benefits the school. For more info about that, keep reading.
Resources
• Consider joining j, JEA’s student organization. j offers opportunities for student journalists to connect with their peers across the country.
http://jea.org/home/resources-for-students/j/
• Check out “Friends of the Spoke” for a model you can use when creating your own publications support group.
http://www.friendsofthespoke.org/Friends_of_The_Spoke.html
• Reach out to inform community about journalism
http://jeasprc.org/reaching-out-informing-the-community-about-key-principles-of-journalism/