Fond du Lac English department statement
should be guide to those who face review
When the Fond du Lac English department issued a statement supporting embattled student journalists there March 21, they signaled clear support against those who would censor student expression.
We urge other groups in high schools across the country follow their lead, especially if their student media labor under prior review.
[pullquote]We urge other groups in high schools across the country follow their lead, especially if their student media labor under prior review.[/pullquote]
Students at the school have faced censorship since their principal imposed new prior review directives March 10 following student publication of “The “Rape Joke” story, a look at what student journalists felt was a “culture of rape” at the school and focused on three students who said they were raped.
Important parts of the English department statement include:
• …“The story, itself, stands as an exemplar of high quality, responsible journalism that has helped countless readers feel supported, speak up, seek help, and come together in a way that has undoubtedly resulted in a more positive environment in our school. We need more stories like this one, not fewer.
• “The fact that the new guidelines were drawn up so quickly, in defiance of past precedent, without warning or consultation with the school newspaper advisor or staff or other interested parties, and in the most restrictive form possible has the students worried that such stories, while powerful and community-building, may be controversial or not be “positive” enough to gain future approval.
• “Our students, allowed some freedom to work together to think critically and make informed choices on their own along with the guidance of a highly qualified instructor, are capable of truly amazing things. Such work should be celebrated, not censored.”
The group also urged the superintendent and school board to support the open forum for student expression and to drafted new guidelines “in collaboration with students, community and experts in the field” to accomplish that.
We absolutely agree, for these reasons and countless others:
• No one has ever demonstrated legitimate educational rationale for prior review. Defenses almost always come in the form of public relations and personal administrative preferences. Not even the Hazelwood decision supports that.
• Academic rigor and civic engagement require student decision-making and critical thinking where students apply the principles they learn. Anything less prevents the authentic learning a journalistically responsible student media must demonstrate.
• A free and unfettered journalism is at the core of a democracy. If students see they cannot practice what they are taught, they will come to see that democracy as flawed, unreal and unworthy of protection.
• Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in The Elements of Journalism and its follow-up book Blur, say journalism’s first obligation is to the truth. Achieving that, through accuracy, balance and coherence of content cannot occur under the practice of prior review.
• In Blur, Kovach and Rosenstiel emphasize the discipline of verification, which is also limited if not impossible in an atmosphere of prior review.
• We strongly support the Questions about Prior Review the department mentions as they substantially reflect JEA policy and beliefs.
We strongly urge English departments, social studies departments, parent booster groups and any citizen or educator who supports learning and rigor in schools to examine the Fond du Lac English department statement.
The statement provides a summary of essential positions JEA and other scholastic media groups have advocated for years. For more about those beliefs and principles, go here.
[pullquote]Whether we teach freedom of expression in English and journalism, social studies or news/media literacy, we must practice that belief or all the rigor and literacy we give lip service to will be shallow, meaningless words.[/pullquote]
As we move forward with authentic learning, expanded news literacy and civic engagement, we must prime our students with real practices that reflect what they are taught.
Whether we teach freedom of expression in English and journalism, social studies or news/media literacy, we must practice that belief or all the rigor and literacy we give lip service to will be shallow, meaningless words.
Read More
Court ruling may give
new meaning to ‘open mic’
by Stan Zoller
The ruling by the Illinois Supreme Court that strikes down the state statute prohibiting the recording of conversations without permission may not be the panacea a lot of people are hoping for.
The Chicago Tribune reports the statute was considered among the strictest in the country. The Court said loud conversations in public could not “be deemed private,”,noting “…a loud argument on the street, a political debate on a college quad, yelling fans at an athletic event, or any conversation loud enough that the speakers should expect to be heard by others.”
The case was, to no surprise, complicated and came as a result of recordings made by Annabel Melongo who recorded three telephone conversations she had with a court reporter supervisor at the Leighton Criminal Court Building about the policy for correcting a hearing transcript. Melongo was convicted and spent 20 months in Cook County Jail. Melongo also posted those recordings on the Internet.
[pullquote]At a time when there are more and more “citizen journalists,” professional journalists need to maintain or raise the bar of ethical news gathering. A gentle reminder that a conversation is being recorded is a great step to incorporate.[/pullquote]
While the Court’s ruling does not specifically cite the recording of telephone conversations, you can bet that there are those people who will record anything without asking.
And therein lies the problem.
For responsible citizens and journalists, the use of recording devices is a useful backup to ensure accuracy as no one likes to be misquoted. Freedom to record does not diminish the need for courtesy and ethics. It seems logical that a reporter, or other individual seeking to record a conversation, would inform the interviewee – whether it’s an in-person or phone interview. I imagine there will be a new round of protocol for both interviewers and interviewees.
For interviewers, inform; for interviewees, ask. If the Court ruling does in fact cover telephone interviews, do people now have to answer their phone “hello, please don’t record this?”
So while people will point the finger at over-zealous interviewers, there seems to be a possibility some people, especially public officials, may clam up out of fear of being recorded. Good bye transparency. At some point, in some way, the two sides need to work together. Responsible recorders, and for the sake of argument, journalists, need to have full disclosure from public officials no matter how the information is being taken down – writer or recorded. Conversely, journalists will need to follow ethical standards and not be deceitful in how they record (written or audio) information.
The Code of Ethics for the Society of Professional Journalists state that journalists should “…Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story…”
Quite simply, in most cases, do not be deceitful.
At a time when there are more and more “citizen journalists,” professional journalists need to maintain or raise the bar of ethical news gathering. A gentle reminder that a conversation is being recorded is a great step to incorporate.
Conversely, interviewees, especially public officials, need to recognize the need for transparency and not hide behind a microphone.
It’s a two-way street and in the end, it’s the news consumer who benefits the most.
For a look at the opinion by the Illinois Supreme Court, go to Eavesdropping Opinion
Read MoreInformation worth knowing
Looking for new topics for your staff or for lessons?
Take note of these current topics and issues:
• The US Supreme Court refused to hear a Pennsylvania school district’s appeal of the “I (heart) boobies” federal appeals court decision.
• Storytelling is the same no matter the platform. The takeaway: “The other model is called gossip. And journalism was invented to be an antidote to gossip,” says CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley about not having time to check information before publishing.
• In Accurate, Fair & Safe: The Ethics of Social News, Mandy Jenkins and Andy Carver explore basic ethics for citizen journalists, and arguably, for scholastic media as well.
• When Getty Images released 35 million of its images earlier this month, it created the possibility of interesting ethical and legal questions. Will scholastic journalists use their images – and how.
Read MoreStudent free speech vs. adviser job security?
“But what do you do if what they want to publish may cause a problem?” Rachel asked, a little furrow of a frown between her eyes.
She and the other 16 education majors in Kent State’s Teaching High School Journalism course had heard all about the value of a free press from Knight Chair in Scholastic Journalism Mark Goodman. He had met with them the week before when I had to miss class. Now I was back, explaining the value of the Tinker standard and re-emphasizing their future students’ First Amendment rights.
Rachel and most of the others felt our passion and wanted to believe, but…they envisioned a lot of “what ifs” for new teachers.
Read MoreDoes your mother love you: Get three sources;
Is the Verification Handbook useful: Check it out
As scholastic media and their advisers move more to online media and use more social media as a reporting tool, verification remains a critical issue.
Enter the Verification Handbook, a product of Poynter’s Craig Silverman and American Copy Editors Society (ACES) Merrill Perlman.
Subtitled “A definitive guide to verifying digital content for emergency coverage” it comes across as a thorough, easy to use and authoritative tool for our students to use as they grow into digital and social media reporting.
Read More