Prior 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
The most important meeting
by Lindsay Coppens, adviser of The Harbinger, Algonquin Regional High School, Northborough, MA
Keep them separated.
That was my mentality when I first starting advising my high school’s newspaper. By “them” I meant the administration and the student editors.
By separated I didn’t mean student reporters shouldn’t interview administration (they are often invaluable sources), but I do think this mentality harmed the journalistic process in the long run. In my mind, keeping them separated was a way to protect student independence. We’re a publication with a limited public forum and no prior review, and although the administrators were generally supportive and respectful of the process, I wanted them to keep their hands off!
I now know this approach was flawed.
[pullquote]Another important part of the adviser’s role is to facilitate communication between the editors and administrators and to help staff members learn effective modes of communication.[/pullquote]
Yes, an important part of the adviser’s role is to protect the scholastic press’s independence, but I’ve realized this separation-focused approach can be detrimental. An us-against-them mentality developed, and inevitably, because the paper is run by high school students who occasionally make mistakes, the principal would raise concerns about the publication’s product or process. These concerns would lead to meetings which often had an undercurrent of fear, anger and defensiveness. We would all feel stressed and at least a little afraid of the next call or email from the administration.
And then one day I woke up and realized at least some of this stress and fear could be my fault.
Another important part of the adviser’s role is to facilitate communication between the editors and administrators and to help staff members learn effective modes of communication.
I realized that publication life would be less stressful and student journalists would be more empowered if they met with the principal preemptively. We started a tradition of a back-to-school conversation with the overall goals of establishing respectful relationships, determining modes of effective communication, and gaining an understanding of mutual and differing goals.
This back-to-school meeting between the Editors-in-Chief, the school principal and myself usually lasts only about 45 minutes but it has drastically transformed our perceptions and understanding of each other.
Some of the talking points:
- The editors’ roles, values, and why they love working on the paper
- Goals for the year
- The publication’s social and community role
- Law and ethics (including forum status, why it’s essential that we do not have prior review, and the publication’s code of ethics)
- The publication’s process (of not only reporting, but also a brief overview of fact-checking, editing, and what they do if they make mistakes)
- The best ways for editors and administrators to communicate
- What the principal will do if she receives concerns or complaints from a community member regarding the publication or if she has her own concerns
- The principal’s questions
- Any initial story ideas or topics the principal may want to share
During this meeting, I talk little and listen a lot. Often I take notes while the editors and principal talk. If needed, I help facilitate the conversation. I also want the administrator to understand my role as an adviser: that I am not an editor and I do not approve copy, but help editors coach their staff, communicate and organize effectively, and produce a publication they are proud of.
Since we’ve started the tradition of this back-to-school meeting, the relationship between the principal and publication’s editors has been notably more productive and collegial. For example, when an article or editorial questions administrative decisions, there has been less kick-back and more understanding that questioning and reporting incisively are important parts of the publication’s role. Or when a parent recently demanded the principal reprimand a student journalist for expressing a view the parent didn’t agree with the principal not only defended the student’s right to expression but also immediately opened communication with the student editors.
This meeting is the first important step in having a positive year. Learning about where the editors are coming from helps the principal build trust that they are committed to producing good journalism. The principal is more likely to understand that scholastic journalism not only plays an important social and democratic role in the community but also that it is a learning experience.
However, one meeting is only the start of a conversation that continues to develop throughout the year. And while conflicts may arise, I’ve found that this initial dialogue focused on the objectives, process, and ethics of a free student press is by far the best way to begin.
Read More
Second day concerns
by Lori Keekley
It’s not the first day of school that has me worried. It’s the second.
St. Louis Park’s first day involves some get-to-know-you activity, but we start content on the second. And this is why I’m worried.
With the summer of fake news and recent news of the events of Charlottesville, Virginia, I want my students to understand why what they do is so important.
So, on the second day, we will revisit our mission statement.
I want them to understand the importance of giving voice to the voiceless as both the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics and Poynter’s Guiding Principles state. I will have them read Columbia Journalism Review’s article, “The Voiceless have a Voice. A Journalist’s Job is to Amplify it.”
I want our students who have not only experienced the news from this past weekend, but also the trial results of the death of Philando Castile to have a voice.
I’m proud my students are on board. Although they just reworked our mission statement last year, my editors want to make sure they include that needed voice.
And again, it will be their decision on how they work toward the mission and how they will work to include multiple voices in their coverage to show the best story they can
Read MoreBuilding foundations for great journalism
by Kristin Taylor
Inevitably, my intro journalism students have one question: “When do we get to start writing?” Their impatience is understandable — they joined my class to become reporters, and they are eager to start that work — but I believe it is critically important to build a solid foundation in law and ethics before sending them out for that first assignment.
I want them to see the bigger picture — to get a sense of why journalists pursue stories and how they make difficult decisions during that process. I want them to understand their own rights and the role of a free press in a democracy. I also want them to have a sense of the laws affecting them — for example, what libel is and how to avoid it and what constitutes “invasion of privacy.”
It’s heavy stuff, so my goal is to keep them engaged during those first few weeks as we talk about journalistic ethics and break down how the First Amendment, state laws, libel laws and court cases affect them.
Here are some strategies I’ve developed that I hope will help other advisers build those crucial foundations without losing students’ interest:
• Make it concrete. Rather than just giving them a list of journalist ethics, ask them to apply those ethics to situations they could face in the year to come. For example, what does it mean to “be independent” as sports reporters? Share coverage of a professional sports team and ask why the reporter doesn’t end with “Go [sports team]!” at the end. How does that impact their own sports reporting?
• Use case studies. Give students “what if” scenarios based on real situations or scandals and let them discuss and problem-solve. Provide relevant laws or guidelines for students to use as resources. Once they’ve come up with their own approaches, reveal the real situation and explain what happened.
• Have a debate. To introduce important court cases such as Hazelwood, split the class in half and let them debate each side, giving them enough information that they can see each perspective. At the end of the debate, share the actual outcome, discuss their feelings about the case and what they learned about its impact.
• Don’t talk too much. Too often when presenting this kind of information, we slip into lecture mode while our students drift away. Don’t talk for more than 5-6 minutes straight; get your students to think about the information, turn to a neighbor to discuss it and then share takeaways with the class — or — break up longer lectures with multiple choice games like Kahoot so they can compete to check their understanding. Kahoot is also a great way to start class to review previous learning.
• Look for multimedia. You can often find short videos to explain foundational knowledge rather than talking about it yourself. The Newseum Ed site — register for a free teacher teacher account —has great video resources about topics ranging from the First Amendment to fake news.
• Co-teach. New students, especially younger ones, look up to the older editors and advanced writers. Let them co-teach these crucial foundations with you. Your newbies will listen to them much more than they listen to us. You could also bring in local adult journalists.
• Reflect. I believe this is the most important part of instruction, yet we often run out of time and skip it. Leave time at the end of every class to reflect on what students have learned and why they are learning it. Why is it important? How does it affect them as student journalists? As future members of society? Also, don’t forget to reflect on your own instruction. Ask students for feedback on how the class went and use that feedback for future instruction. If they feel like you’re all part of the same instructional team, they are a lot more likely to invest in their learning.
Whatever approach you take, this is the time to build the foundations to make your media program strong. Don’t let them skip “the boring stuff” — prove how important and exciting it can be.
Read More