|
« AAUP Homepage
|
State of the Profession: Academic Freedom and Student Newspapers
By Martin Snyder
Back in 1967, racial segregation was headline news. When a federal court in Montgomery, Alabama, ruled that all public schools in the state be integrated, Alabama’s governor, Lurleen Wallace, publicly opposed the ruling. Frank Rose, who was then president of the University of Alabama, refused to join the governor in her opposition. The controversy between the governor and the president became heated. Editorials and letters on both sides of the issue appeared frequently in the press, including student newspapers.
At Troy State College (now Troy State University), Gary Dickey, a student editor of the school paper, wrote a courageous and thoughtful editorial supporting Rose’s position. The president of Troy State, alleging "agitation" and disloyalty, banned the publication of the editorial and took retaliatory measures against the student and the faculty members who supported him. Not surprisingly, Troy State was added to the Association’s list of censured administrations in 1968.
Fast forward to the beginning of the twenty-first century, a time of different crises but some of the same reprehensible behaviors. Last April, a second-year medical student was expelled from Texas Tech University’s School of Medicine, allegedly for the columns he published in the student newspaper. The student had written several editorials critical of the university’s administration and local politicians, but it was apparently a column he wrote about the insensitivity of the county medical examiner during an autopsy that provoked the administration’s wrath. The student is suing the university, claiming violation of his First Amendment rights.
At about the same time, the faculty adviser to the student newspaper at the University of Texas at Tyler was informed that her contract would not be renewed. An experienced journalist herself, she encouraged her students to be aggressive in their reporting and, when information was not forthcoming, to file Freedom of Information Act requests. The administration seems to have felt that students were getting into things that were none of their business. Professional journalism organizations criticized the university’s action against the adviser. Yielding to mounting pressure, the administration reversed its decision and agreed to renew the adviser’s contract. It further established a Student Media Advisory Board. The new board does not have authority to censor the content of student publications or punish editors for controversial content, nor can it retaliate against an adviser who refuses to "exercise editorial control over the student publication or otherwise suppress the protected free expression of student journalists." Chalk up one victory for students and faculty.
And that brings us to the continuing saga at Mount Saint Mary’s College in Maryland. For the past fourteen years, William Lawbaugh, associate professor of communications, has been adviser to the student newspaper. In winter 2000, the college’s provost formally reprimanded him for not exercising sufficient control over, that is, censoring, the student newspaper, the Mountain Echo. She also levied a fine of nearly $4,000 on Lawbaugh, who was denied a hearing before his peers, due process, and the right to appeal. The college’s president granted Lawbaugh access to a grievance procedure only after the Student Press Law Center, the Society for Professional Journalists, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, and the AAUP all weighed in on his behalf.
The college finally decided to restore the money cut from Lawbaugh’s salary but announced plans to hire a consultant to investigate his advising. (Previously, the college had suspected Lawbaugh and the student managers of the newspaper of misappropriation of funds and had hired a high-profile accounting firm to investigate. The result: no evidence of wrongdoing and a bill for $19,000, twice the amount the college provides to support the newspaper each year.) It is not clear how or when the Mount Saint Mary’s episode will end.
When administrations attack student newspapers and their advisers, they usually offer quality as the reason for their actions. Undoubtedly, most student newspapers could be improved, but it is difficult not to suspect other motives that have more to do with control and secrecy. Particularly in the current climate, when security provides the pretext for secrecy and criticism is equated with disloyalty, administrations may find that silencing the press is a convenient way to elude accountability and to avoid the embarrassment of public criticism. Students and faculty advisers who resist such behaviors are true heroes of academic freedom.
Martin Snyder is AAUP director of planning and development.
|