‘Put up’ guidelines
Ethical guidelines
Having a set of standards to follow before posting online or print content might help avoid material that causes someone to send a takedown demand.
Whether students post mainly online or to a combination of print and online, student staffs should develop authentication procedures before publishing striving to avoid Takedown Demand hassles.
Staff manual process
Student journalists should establish a plan to vet all information and images before publishing them. All journalists should be trained in the use of this plan before using it.
Suggestions
• Independently confirm information to be used for accuracy, context, perspective, truth and coherence
• Determine whether sources used are credible and representative of diverse and knowledgeable viewpoints
• Clearly attribute all information as needed for clarity and authority
• Avoid anonymous sources except in situations where they are the best and perhaps only source and where identities need protection
• Determine whether sources used have conflicts of interest
• Ensure your information has gone through a vetting process with editors
• If using teens or young people as sources for sensitive topics, realize interviewing their parents could add more credibility and context while also ensuring the parents are not surprised by a story they did not expect.
• If using social media sources, be sure information is attributed, accurate, in context and used legally and ethically
• Train and background reporters in legal and ethical issues
• If using crowd generated content, clearly indicate the source and ensure its credibility
• Be skeptical of any information you cannot verify
Resources
5 Ways News Organizations Respond to ‘Unpublishing’ Requests, The Poynter Institute
Takedown Demands: Here is a Roadmap of Choices, Rationale, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Respond to Takedown Demands, Student Press Law Center
Setting Criteria Before the Requests Come, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
10 Steps to a Put-Up Policy, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Audio: Takedown Requests, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Lessons in transparency, by George
by Stan Zoller, MJE
Unlike sports, journalism has no season.
While a football season may go three months, a journalism season goes nine. And then some.
So even as advisers get ready to distribute yearbooks or put out that last edition of the paper, their work, and that of their student journalists, is not over.
While they may not be producing anything for their media, the issues and trends in journalism continue to whirl about them.
While there are a litany of workshops for advisers to learn how to advise media and teach journalism, the never-ending sagas about the world of journalism provides timely and “real life” case studies for discussions about ethics in your journalism classroom.
Some of the more notable cases included Jayson Blair, Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass and of course Brian Williams. Their reputations for fabrications in their reporting are virtually legendary. But they are not the only ones.
While fabrications captivate media observers, journalism educators included, they are but one stain of disdain on the fabric of reputable journalism.
In addition to the expectations that journalists, whether student or professional, present accurate and honest reports, there is the expectation journalists are transparent in their reporting.
And why not? Reporters expect their sources, especially those in public positions such as city councils and school boards, to be transparent.
That’s not always the case.
Hello, George Stephanopoulos.
Stephanopoulos, who flew into the limelight during various stints with former President Bill Clinton, including press director of Clinton’s 1992 Campaign and White House Communications Director, is now chief political reporter at ABC News where he has appeared on Good Morning America and hosts the network’s Sunday show This Week.
Considering that background, you would expect Stephanopoulos to be transparent and accurate.
The keyword is expect.
But that has not been the case recently. Stephanopoulos came under fire for not, according to CNN, reporting he had made a $75,000 contribution to the Clinton Foundation. No big deal?
It is when you are covering Hilary Clinton’s campaign and were scheduled to moderate presidential debates in 2016.
What makes Stephanopoulos’ faux pau annoying is not that he did it, but the American news consumer continues to be put on edge by journalists, some of whom elevate to god-like status, in their reporting.
Trust in journalism begins not at the keyboard, but in the newsroom before an interview is conducted.
Student journalists need to not only understand, but practice transparency. It’s not unusual for student journalists to want to take an ‘easy way out’ on a story and maybe use sources or materials that give them path of least resistance. Interviewing friends or colleagues in a club, sport or organization are not unheard of. Policy and procedure manuals should include a statement regarding transparency and any conflict of interest.
Conversely, student journalists need to check and recheck their sources’ background so they know exactly where the source “is coming from.”
Taking an easy way out may seem like a great way to meet a deadline.
It’s not a good idea when it comes to developing and presenting trust in reporting.
Read MoreFacing takedown demands requires
thoughtful planning of guidelines
Because student media takedown demands continue to grow and the JEA listserv recently discussed issues that could be involved in information takedown, JEA’s Scholastic Press Rights Committee reposts guidelines to assist students and their advisers who face these requests.
We agree with the Student Press Law Center’s Executive Director Frank LoMonte who said the SPLC has shied away from telling people a ”right way” to handle takedown requests, leaving the decision to their editorial discretion.
So, instead of a single guideline, we offer this set of resources to help students make informed choices.
In all situations, we recommend the SPLC’s existing work on the subject. We hope these guidelines will offer a roadmap if your students face takedown decisions.
Even more importantly, we believe in establishing guidelines to evaluate information before it is posted: Put Up recommendations might prevent facing unsatisfactory decisions later because a 15-year-old did not consider the implications of an ill-chosen comment or questionable image.
We urge advisers to train student reporters to verify information and use credible and reliable sources as more effective approach than taking down content.
If students decide information must come down, this resource from The Poynter Institute suggests thoughtful alternatives to just taking something down.
Below is a model ethics-staff manual statement, as part of our Foundations of Journalism policy-ethics-staff manual package. Such a statement or one similar, should be part of student media’s ethical guidelines and staff manuals.
Takedown requests
Ethical guidelines
Journalists may be asked to remove online content for any number of reasons. Just because content is unpopular or controversial does not mean a media staff should comply with such requests. When journalists meet their goal of producing consistent, responsible journalism, they likely will choose to leave the content in question online even in the face of criticism.
All media – including student media – provide a historical record of issues, events and comments. As such, content should not be changed unless there are unusual circumstances.
Staff manual process
Content should not be removed unless the student editorial board determines it is factually inaccurate or was otherwise factually, legally deficient at the time of publication. The staff manual should provide a checklist or guide students can use to determine whether a takedown request has merit.
Suggestions
• In some cases, student editors may take down a story because they determine the content warrants a one-time exception (such as fabrication or to protect a source).
• Reporters may elect to do a follow-up story.
• If student editors choose to remove content, they should publish a note on the site explaining when and why the content was removed.
• Takedown criteria should be outlined and explained in the staff manual.
• Create guidelines and procedures to ensure students only post information and images they feel meet standards of responsible journalism: Put Up guidelines.
Resources
5 Ways News Organizations Respond to ‘Unpublishing’ Requests, The Poynter Institute
Takedown Demands: Here is a Roadmap of Choices, Rationale, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Respond to Takedown Demands, Student Press Law Center
Setting Criteria Before the Requests Come, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
10 Steps to a Put-Up Policy, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Audio: Takedown Requests, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Working with a board-approved policy
Policy
Staffs should include the district policy in their staff manuals if available. If not, they should work towards reaching agreement with the administration and school board for a policy all can agree makes the most educational sense. Three examples of these board policies are available, each with that same basic premise but with increasingly more detail and explanation of philosophy. Each, however, begins with the statement that all student media are designated public forums where students make all content decisions.
It’s important to stick to the basics for the board-approved policies. If ethical or journalistic practice decisions are included in an official school policy, the limitations they describe take on a whole new significance. Now they are not just for the staff to enforce but, by implication, are provisions that school administrators could use to discipline a publication staff or adviser or even to censor content that they believe violates what is written. Including a subjective ethical determination in a school policy gives the school the ability to overrule the ethical decisions of student editors.
Lacking a board-approved policy, student media staffs should create one of their own. (LINK) Although this doesn’t have the legal weight of a board-approved policy, it should state the publication is a designate public forum for student expression where students make all content decisions. This shows how the media staffs operate and could show they are forums “in practice.” While not as solid a legal foundation as “in policy,” courts have recognized this as free speech protection under Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier.
Ethical guidelines
Students should understand that while they can and should adopt best practices and ethical guidelines for their publication, the school district’s or school board’s media policy (if one exists) could impact student editors’ ethical decisions. This reality does not preclude students from exercising their best ethical judgment. Rather, it is an incentive for students to advocate their role and a district-level policy that protects them.
Staff manual process
A student media staff manual should include copies of the school district or school board media policy as well as media editorial policy. Furthermore, the staff manual may provide procedures for students addressing the school administration in the case of a disagreement or policy confusion. Students should also consider including in the manual some guidelines for proposing policy changes to the school board or petitioning the district for a policy to improve on what they have (e.g., How does a student request to be put on the agenda for a school board meeting?).
Suggestions
• Obtain a copy of the school district’s media or student expression policy.
• Compare district policy to your staff procedure and identify potential areas for misunderstanding or conflict (e.g., the district policy includes more restrictions on student speech/press than actually occurs).
• Make a plan to advocate change in the district’s policy that would align it more closely with how the staff really operates.
• Recognize that student media staffs, not the adviser, are best suited to advocate their role. Advisers must navigate a difficult line as employee and should not be put in a position to defend student work.
• Consider advocating a state law that would protect student free expression rights.
Resources
Lesson: Developing a Presentation for Your School Board, Journalism Education Association
Rethinking Your Forum Status, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
What Do I Do When I’m Censored?, Student Press Law Center
Model Guidelines for High School Student Media, Student Press Law Center
Model Legislation to Protect Student Free Expression Rights, Student Press Law Center
JEA Model Editorial Policy, Journalism Education Association
Audio: Board Media Policies, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Audio: The Tinker Standard, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Audio: The Hazelwood Decision, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Audio: Combined Editorial Policy, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee, Press Rights Minute
Understanding the Difference Between a School Board policy and Publication Policy/practice, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Deciding Which Forum Best Serves Your Students – and your Community, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Questions to Answer in Policy Development, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Philosophical Questions About Policy Development, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Importance of Designated Public Forum Status, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Other Policy Considerations, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
To return to Policy and Ethics sitemap, go here.
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 More