Most Recent Articles
Allowing sources to preview content
is ethically questionable QT12
The newest reporter on staff chooses to cover the story about the Science Department’s new policy on studying animal life. To do so, she must interview the head about a new policy on studying animal life. It’s fairly controversial because People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is strongly opposed to dissection and the new curriculum for advanced biology includes that.
What to do if sources, including the expert, want to see the story ahead of time?
Showing media content to sources is really just another form of prior review — but one with some hidden challenges. Sometimes the source can make it sound like its his or her understood right to review, and an untrained reporter might just agree. Also, the adult often believes the student might “get it wrong” and publish misinformation that could create problems. However, both students and sources should build trust in the reporting process by demonstrating integrity in their information-gathering and fact-checking processes.
Guideline:
Sources do not have the right to review materials prior to publication. Allowing sources to preview content at any stage of production raises serious ethical and journalistic practice questions.
Stance:
Showing media content to sources is a topic that may come up unexpectedly. Often a school administrator, teacher or other “adult of power” makes the request, and student reporters are unsure if they can — or should — refuse. This creates confusion and misunderstanding.
Students should not show content to sources because it is another form of prior review with ethical and journalistic challenges. They should be aware such requests are possible and know what to do if they happen.
Reasoning/suggestions:
Showing media content to sources is really just another form of prior review — but one with some hidden challenges. Sometimes the source can make it sound like its his or her understood right to review, and an untrained reporter might just agree. Also, the adult often believes the student might “get it wrong” and publish misinformation that could create problems. However, both students and sources should build trust in the reporting process by demonstrating integrity in their information-gathering and fact-checking processes.
Students may opt to verify quotes by reading them back to sources. If sources indicate quotes are inaccurate, students should check their notes and act accordingly. This should not include changing the original quotes because sources want to revise their statements.
Another unintended consequence of seeing the entire story: If sources see others’ quotes or information in the story, they have an opportunity to refute them before anything is published, giving one source an advantage over the other.
Resources:
“Show and print,” American Journalism Review
“Ethical Case Study: A lesson on the rules of prior approval of quotes, content”
The Essentials of Sourcing, Reuters
Writing and Reporting the News, Carole Rich
Sharing Stories With Sources Before Publication Is Risky, But Can Improve Accuracy, Steve Buttry
Lesson: Crafting the Argument, Journalism Education Association
Lesson: A Lesson on the Rules of Prior Approval of Quotes, Content, JEA Scholastic Press Rights Committee
Read More
Fake or Fact? seminar available
via live-streaming, archived video
Looking for additional materials for Constitution Day and lessons about fake news in addition to what’s available from JEA and the SPRC?
The 13th annual Poynter-Kent State University Media Ethics Workshop is Thursday, Sept. 21, and focuses on fake news. The theme is “Fake or Fact?”
Details about the workshop, including speaker bios and a tentative schedule, are here.
A lesson plan for scholastic students, created by Candace Bowen, is available on the site.
The event is on the record, live streamed and archived. Show your students panel discussions as the happen or return to them by accessing the archives.
The keynote speaker will be NPR’s David Folkenflik, NPR media correspondent who is now featured in Netflix’s documentary “Nobody Speak.”
Other sessions will address fake news and journalism credibility, fake news and the 2016 election, how to identify and combat fake news, and fake news and public relations. Kelly McBride, Poynter’s VP, will be present, along with Indira Lakshmanan, who is Poynter’s new ethics chair.
You may recognize Indira as the Boston Globe’s Washington columnist who is frequently on PBS’s Washington Week and other political news shows.
Read More
The issues with April Fools coverage QT 11
April Fool’s issues are fake news and can damage student media’s credibility.
Yes, some find them acceptable, but their negatives far outweigh their positives. The ultimate question is are they worth the risks?
As a publication that strives for authentic, storytelling journalism for your community, breaking that convention for a satirical, or even mean, publication is counter to the principles good journalists should strive for. When you break the conventions and principles for which you are known to produce satire, you may be opening yourself up to charges of libel, obscenity, or even disruption. Satire is incredibly hard to do consistently well and correctly, and it is best left to the professionals who have far more protection.
Guidelines: April Fools issues have little to no journalistic value and do not advance the brand of student media. As a result, students should not publish an April Fool’s issue.
Question: Are April Fool’s issues and satire worth the risk? What is the journalistic value of publishing April Fools materials?
Key points/action: If your goal is to publish factual stories with impact and significance, then publishing April Fools material and other fake news may not be your priority. To publish information you know is false might lead to other legal and ethical issues, but if your media are designated public forums, that would be your choice and your responsibility.
Students publishing information they know is not true would be well advised to have a good grasp of legal and ethical journalistic standards.
Professionals have mastered the art of satire and comedy as a form of news reporting, but does that mean we should be trying to teach it in high school? Publications like The Onion have shown us satire can tell stories at the same time that they entertain, but can we effectively teach students to master the same skill
Stance: There are no quick and easy absolutes. Students need to balance their free expression rights with their mission and social responsibility to truth, accuracy and verified reporting. School publications put themselves at great risk when they publish April Fool’s issues and/or satire.
Reasoning/suggestions: Publishing something knowingly false raises significant legal issues of libel and malice and the newly concerning fake news plague. Decisions to choose a path that brings your student media into conflict with serious legal and ethical issues would have to fulfill essential media missions and goals.
Professional publications engaging in satire do so with a clear brand. Most of the public clearly recognizes the convention of the medium, and that gives it much more protection. Your student publication does not have the same brand.
As a publication that strives for authentic, storytelling journalism from your community, breaking that convention for a satirical publication is counter to the principles good journalists should strive for. When you break the conventions and principles for which you are known to produce satire, you may open yourselves to charges of libel, obscenity or even disruption. Satire is incredibly hard to do consistently well and correctly, and it is best left to the professionals who have far more protection.
Resources:
April Fools’ negatives outweigh positives, usually don’t fulfill techniques of satire
SPLC article: The joke is on these college editors — offensive April Fools humor can backfire badly
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.
Read MoreSo your student media
want to do senior wills? QT10
Because senior wills have minimal journalistic value and great potential for damage, they should not be used in school publications.
Seniors wills have been dying a slow death in high school yearbooks. Yes, students love them, but can we defend them as a journalistic device? Do they represent the best of our work, and the most creative way to tell the stories of students in our schools?
Publishing something information not related to all students and which creates significant issues of review might have harsher outcomes than foreseen. Passing Senior Wills off to the senior class for publication might be a workable solution to solving a clash between professional standards and meeting student desires.
Guideline: Because senior wills have minimal journalistic value and great potential for damage, they should not be used in school publications.
Question: What is the journalistic value in publishing senior wills?
Key points/action: Seniors wills have been dying a slow death in high school yearbooks. Yes, students love them, but can we defend them as a journalistic device? Do they represent the best of our work, and the most creative way to tell the stories of students in our schools?
Stance: Students need to balance their free expression rights with their mission and social responsibility to truth, accuracy and verified reporting. Senior wills should be taken out of your yearbooks and replaced with better ways of telling student stories.
Reasoning/suggestions: Publishing something information not related to all students and which creates significant issues of review might have harsher outcomes than foreseen. Passing Senior Wills off to the senior class for publication might be a workable solution to solving a clash between professional standards and meeting student desires.
Senior wills are a vestige of the past and serve little purpose in advancing the stories of the school year. When you allow senior wills, you are inviting others to create content for the product which has your name behind it. You lose control of the message and invite students the opportunity to include inside jokes, Libel, innuendo or other messages which may harm other students in your school. Content could slip in that covertly bullies or harms members of your community, and you would be responsible for it.
Resources: Winner of ‘worst reputation’ award sues Ind. High school over comments in newspaper
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.
Read More
Should student media publish
senior superlatives? QT9
Publishing senior superlatives, if seniors decide they are worthwhile at all, is one of those “traditions” best moved from student media to those who most clearly benefit – the senior class.
Face it, publishing senior superlatives is akin to publishing fake news. They are not newsworthy, not in line with most student media mission statements and not factually based. It can also be argued they take precious funding from other more journalistically responsible topics.
That said, if students really feel they serve a legitimate or traditional purpose, move them totally to the legal, ethical and financial responsibility of senior class officers, including printing or distribution.
We recommend student editorial boards begin work with senior class officials to shift the legal, ethical and financial responsibility to those affected. Once those students and their adults see the difficulties of publishing senior superlatives, only time will tell their future.
Guideline
Publishing senior superlatives, if seniors decide they are worthwhile at all, is one of those “traditions” best moved from student media to those who most clearly benefit – the senior class.
Question: Should student media publish senior superlatives?
Key points/action:
Face it, publishing senior superlatives is akin to publishing fake news. They are not newsworthy, not in line with most student media mission statements and not factually based. It can also be argued they take precious funding from other more journalistically responsible topics.
That said, if students really feel they serve a legitimate or traditional purpose, move them totally to the legal, ethical and financial responsibility of senior class officers, including printing or distribution.
Stance:
Senior superlatives should not take away space, time or finances from responsible journalism. Shift the energy it takes to come up with them to those who benefit most, the senior class.
Reasoning/suggestions:
Students, and sometimes school officials, sometimes forget their main mission of publishing: informing their communities of real news that affect them. Senior superlatives achieve none of those standards.
We recommend student editorial boards begin checking with senior class officials to shift the legal, ethical and financial responsibility to those affected. Once those students and their adults see the difficulties of publishing senior superlatives, only time will tell their future.
Bottom line: student media should stay away from fake news and focus on real stories.
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.
Read More