Policy model 3
Policy 3: Freedom of expression and press freedom are fundamental values in a democratic society.
The mission of any institution committed to preparing productive citizens must include teaching students these values, both by lesson and by example.
For these purposes, as well as to teach students responsibility by empowering them to make and defend their own decisions, school-sponsored student news media, print or online, at [NAME OF SCHOOL] are established as designated public forums for student expression in which students make all final decisions of content.
Such news media will not be reviewed by school officials outside the adviser in his/her coaching role or restrained by school officials prior to, during, or after publication or distribution.
Therefore, material published in school-sponsored news media may not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of the [NAME OF SCHOOL] District, and neither school officials nor the school are legally responsible for their content.
Students are protected by and bound to the principles of the First Amendment and other protections and limitations afforded by the U.S. Constitution and the various court decisions reaffirming those principles.
Comment: This is the same as model two but also includes a statement that student media do not intend to reflect the opinions of school authorities. Like model two, this model addresses the educational value of student media and attaches these issues to legal language. The three essential points made in earlier models appear here as well.
Designated forum: This language (designated forum in policy or practice) should be included in policies at board or publication level because all public forums are designated either by action or inaction (unless the board clearly says otherwise). Being silent as students operate as a forum is really permitting a designated forum.
Return to sitemap.
Read MorePolicy model 2
Policy 2: [NAME OF SCHOOL] student media are designated public forums in which students make all decisions of content without prior review from school officials.
Freedom of expression and press freedom are fundamental values in a democratic society. The mission of any institution committed to preparing productive citizens must include teaching these values and providing a venue for students to practice these values, both by lesson and by example.
As preservers of democracy, our schools shall protect, encourage and enhance free speech and the exchange of ideas as a means of protecting our American way of life.
[NAME OF MEDIA] and its staff are protected by and bound to the principles of the First Amendment and other protections and limitations afforded by the Constitution and the various laws and court decisions implementing those principles.
Comment: Again, this board-level model policy removes process details from being points of board action or meddling. It also introduces educational and philosophical language to give administrators insight into and understanding of why student media do what they do. It can aid in community understanding and support of the forum process.
This policy is slightly longer because it adds philosophical wording to support the decision-making without review. This policy could be effective at the board level because it allows others points to be explained in the ethics guidelines and staff manuals.
Designated forum: This language (designated forum in policy or practice) should be included in policies at board or publication level because all public forums are designated either by action or inaction (unless the board clearly says otherwise). Being silent as students operate as a forum is really permitting a designated forum
Return to sitemap.
Read MorePolicy model 1
Policy 1: [NAME OF SCHOOL] student media are designated public forums in which students make all decisions of content without prior review by school officials.
Comment: This contains only the basic statement of journalistic responsibility. It is usable at the board level to outline the basic principles of external oversight, leaving the process to other internal packages, like ethics guidelines and staff manuals. This removes from consideration the possibility of board attempts to change process-oriented direction.
A short statement like this clearly establishes the principles and responsibilities that guide all other statements. With no prior review added to it, it has the three crucial points in a policy: (1) designated public forum status in which (2) students make all final decisions regarding content and (3) do so without prior review. Decisions on matters such as letters, bylines, staff disciplinary actions, coverage of death and more are best detailed in ethical guidelines and staff manuals.
Designated forum: This language (designated forum in policy or practice) should be included in policies at board or publication level because all public forums are designated either by action or inaction (unless the board clearly says otherwise). Being silent as students operate as a forum is really permitting a designated forum.
Return to sitemap.
Read MoreHow to use this guide for
ethical use of staff manuals
A strong and effective staff manual describes the procedures of the staff in accordance with best policies and specific ethical guidelines. Because a staff manual should be a collaborative creation between students and advisers, it also becomes a living document, changing as necessary to reflect the culture and practices of the staff.
Each year staff members should have the opportunity – and obligation – to update items to ensure the product serves their needs and those of their audiences.
A good staff manual creates an atmosphere consistent with board- and media-level policies’ sound legal principles and uses ethical guidelines to shape procedure. Such a roadmap can help students justify content to administrators or introduce new staffers to common newsroom policies.
[pullquote]A good staff manual creates an atmosphere consistent with board- and media-level policies’ sound legal principles and uses ethical guidelines to shape procedure. Such a roadmap can help students justify content to administrators or introduce new staffers to common newsroom policies.[/pullquote]
While a staff manual is primarily an internal document and not used as a guide to punishment, student media should adhere to staff manual procedures to show professionalism and consistency in approach. This, in turn, can improve the credibility of student media.
For this reason, student media should avoid mixing ethics guidelines with staff manual processes. While processes or procedures can include the verbs “will” and “must,” guidelines should be framed with “should” and “could.”
The elements of this staff manual guide present a buffet of choices for advisers and students looking to build a cohesive, personalized manual. Some may not apply to every school. Other entries will need to be personalized to fit specific student media missions or situations.
So, this guide provides not only the ethical tenets that should shape processes but also suggestions for students and advisers to consider when writing their own staff manual entries.
[pullquote]The elements of this staff manual guide present a buffet of choices for advisers and students looking to build a cohesive, personalized manual. Some may not apply to every school. Other entries will need to be personalized to fit specific student media missions or situations.[/pullquote]
On a final note, students and advisers should know that this guide is not all-inclusive. Instead, we have focused on those entries in a staff manual that are specifically tied to ethical considerations.
A comprehensive staff manual will also include entries that explain important processes that have no significant ethical issues.
To help in your creation of ethical guidelines for staff manuals, we created this model.
Those additional entries might include:
• Advertising rates for that year
• Ad size specifications
• Ad size specifications
• Ad contracts
• Staff roster and contact information
• Grade-level rosters to check names/grades
• Club lists and rosters
• Sports rosters, including coach contact information
• Campus map
• Class room directory
• AP style checklist
• Publication style checklist
• Photo shoot checklist
• Photo editing checklist
• Design/design consistency checklist
• Story/content sequence (how a story moves through the publication system)
• Sports and club schedules
• Bell schedule
• School calendar
• How-to sheets for common design/software procedures
• Faculty roster
• Job descriptions for each staff and adviser position
• Editorial board makeup and duties
• Worknight or workday dates and times
• Sample staff contract
• Equipment checkout procedures
• Parent booster group information
• Sample advertising rate sheet
• Sample advertising ad contract
• Board of education, schools officials names and contact information
• City public officials contact information
• City offices and contact information
• Civic leader names and contact information
• Schedule of board of education meetings and activities
What would you add to the list above? Leave a comment here.
Return to sitemap.
Read More
General resources for Policy and Ethics
in Student Media
Resources listed here can provide additional information for ethics and staff manual development, as well as assistance for your journalism students and program.
Organizations
American Society of News Editors
Columbia Scholastic Press Association
Journalism Education Association
—Scholastic Press Rights Committee
National Association of Broadcasters
National Press Photographer’s Association
National Scholastic Press Association
Radio Television Digital News Association
Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press
Society of Professional Journalists
Publications/Media
Principals Guide to Scholastic Journalism
Press Rights Minute, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Commission
Individuals
Ethics Codes
Articles and materials
Yearbook Ethical Guidelines, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Commission
Students, the First Amendment and the Supreme Court, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Commission
Fighting FERPA With Facts, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Commission
Foundations for Scholastic Journalism, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Commission
Return to sitemap.
Read More
Questions about public forum status
When your publication is a public forum
and when it is not
by Mark Goodman, Professor and Knight Chair in Scholastic Journalism, Kent State University
School officials’ ability to legally censor school-sponsored student expression at public junior high and high schools is determined by whether they can meet the burden the First Amendment places on them to justify their actions. 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.
How do you determine which standard applies? Forum status.
The Supreme Court made clear that the standard it created in the Hazelwood case did not automatically apply to every school-sponsored student publication. Rather, to determine which standard applied to a particular act of censorship of a student publication, a court must first ask this question:
Has the publication, by either school policy or practice, been opened as a designated public forum for student expression?
Even curricular, school-sponsored student publications may still be entitled to strong First Amendment protection and exempt from Hazelwood’s limitations if they have been designated a “public forum” for student expression.
[pullquote]The Supreme Court made clear that the standard it created in the Hazelwood case did not automatically apply to every school-sponsored student publication. Rather, to determine which standard applied to a particular act of censorship of a student publication, a court must first ask this question:
Has the publication, by either school policy or practice, been opened as a designated public forum for student expression?[/pullquote]
How do you determine public forum status?
A 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.
In the Hazelwood case, the Court said that it believed that 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. Nevertheless, 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.
At schools where student editors are given the authority to make final decisions about what will be included in their publication or where a school policy reflects an intent to give students that authority, public forum status will still be found and schools will have to meet the Tinker standard before they can legally censor.
Is your publication a designated public forum?
In the post-Hazelwood world, it is more important than ever that student journalists and their advisers know what policies their school has adopted relating to student publications or student expression. The language of those polices (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.
[pullquote]If you’re developing a new policy, the Scholastic Press Rights Committee recommends using language that reads 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. [/pullquote]
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 that anyone unfamiliar with the relevant Supreme Court rulings should understand.
Return to sitemap.
Read More