Law and EthicsUnderstanding the Legal Issues of

Scholastic Journalism

The Job of a Journalist Journalists serve:

A political function (watchdog of government) An economic function (business, farming, industrial, ads) A sentry function (pointing out social problems) A record-keeping function (important news) An entertainment function (diversion) A social function (gets people talking to one another A marketplace function (place for exchange of ideas) An agenda-setting function

(what the public should be talking about)

Terms Ethics—a system of moral principles Plagiarism—taking and using another’s writings

or inventions as your own. “Composite Characters”—fictional characters a

news writer creates by using characteristics of several real people. The creation of composite characters is generally frowned upon by ethical journalists

Terms-continued Libel—written defamation; damaging false

statements against a person or institution that appear in writing or are spoken from a written script.

Slander—a damaging false statement against a person or institution spoken or broadcast extemporaneously

Prior restraint—censorship banning publication of certain material. This is illegal in the United States except in circumstances concerning national security in wartime.

Terms—continued In loco parentis—the legal idea that school

authorities act “in place of the parent” and assume a parent’s rights, duties, and responsibilities

Forum Theory—the idea that once a forum, or place where ideas are exchanged, is created, the ideas expressed there cannot later be controlled

Journalism Ethics Credibility—must be able to be believed

and trusted Accuracy—close doesn’t count. Names,

dates, details must be correct Objectivity—cannot permit their own

opinions to be a part of their stories. Also—attribution, good taste, right of reply, fairness to

all, plagiarism, the truth

Law and Scholastic Journalism About 40 years ago it was believed that the

control student expression rested with school authorities—they acted in the place of the parent

Sound familiar?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

1st Amendment

Tinker v. Des Moines 1969—during the Vietnam War 3 students in Des Moines, IA decided to

wear black armbands to protest the war. School administrators suspended the

students—the students sued

What is “speech”?

Ruling Lost in district and appeals courts but won

when their case reached the U.S. Supreme Court

The Tinker Decision Supreme court said:

“It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate…School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well as out of school are ‘persons’ under our Constitution”

What did Tinker mean? Prior restraint (censorship) of student journalists is

illegal unless the material was libelous, obscene, an invasion of privacy, or materially or substantially disrupted the school.

School was a public forum where expression must be tolerated

Student editors had the legal right to decide what would go in the publication.

Most principals, advisers, and students worked together and legal problems were rare—until Hazelwood.

Hazelwood S.D. v. Cathy Kuhlmeier

Facts 1983: The student newspaper: The Spectrum prepared

a series of stories about student pregnancy and the effects of divorce on students

Principal deleted the 2 pages of the paper on which the stories were to appear

The principal said they invaded the students privacy even though they were unnamed

Hazelwood Facts, cont. Also believed the topics were inappropriate for

school Principal said he was the publisher of the

newspaper Court of appeals said that government has

never been permitted to control the press, and because the administrators are the “government” of the school they should not control the student pubs.

Arguments for and against Some say administrators should have the

final say because if there is a libel suit the school will have to pay

The other side says libel is a not likely to happen in a school

If schools grant students the responsibility for what they print, then students inherit the responsibility to pay any libel judgments.

Arguments for and against Some say student journalists are too young

and too inexperienced to make mature judgments.

But many student journalists are sophisticated and if they receive proper guidance from their advisers, they will make proper decisions.

Arguments for and against Some say that control belongs to the school

because the yearbook and newspaper are produced by classes—the journalism teacher should exercise control.

This is a good argument for schools where the publications are financed by the school and credit is granted for working on them.

Limits on Hazelwood Supreme court said it was not an open

forum—so they chose in favor of the administrators.

If a school newspaper has been declared a place where members of the school community can exchange ideas they may be in a different legal position than a pure lab newspaper.

States that question HazelwoodArkansas, California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas,

Kentucky, Massachusetts and Oregon have passed laws that sidestep Hazelwood and allow students the same rights as professional journalists

How can they do this? States may grant more freedom than the

federal government; they just can’t grant less

CA Ed Code 48907

Students of the public schools shall have the right to exercise freedom of speech and of the press including, but not limited to, the use of bulletin boards, the distribution of printed materials or petitions, the wearing of buttons, badges, and other insignia, and the right of expression in official publications, whether or not such publications or other means of expression are supported financially by the school or by use of school facilities, except that expression shall be prohibited which is obscene, libelous, or slanderous. Also prohibited shall be material which so incites students as to create a clear and present danger of the commission of unlawful acts on school premises or the violation of lawful school regulations, or the substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.