In the Censor's Crosshairs

OSI

Cliff Hahn

Youth Media Reporter

October 1, 2002

In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier that school officials could censor all forms of student expression if they found "reasonable" educational justification. This decision gave broad authority to censors, creating—especially in states where there are no uniform protective statutes in place—a climate where the degree of censorship depends on program, venue, school and principal. Youth practitioners have responded to these conditions in different ways.

Craig Kirchenberg, journalism teacher and faculty advisor to The Horizon, the student paper at Lynbrook High School in Long Island, New York, says students have free reign to voice their views in the publication. Since the paper functions as an extracurricular activity combined with a classroom journalism course, Kirchenberg stresses the importance of good journalism training. This seems to be enough for the school administration, which does not edit or review the paper's content before publication.

Nancy Slater, advisor to Garden City High's Echo student newspaper in New York, must show all content to a review panel for final approval. "We call them our Guardian Angels," she said. "A few years ago another school publication printed a lot of really tasteless stuff, so the school instituted a policy where all material is submitted to an impartial reader for review." The review panel is chosen from the faculty staff, mostly in the English department. Slater tries not to "step on too many toes" in producing the paper and at times has had to edit content. One concern for school administrators is the potential for controversy over advertisers, such as Planned Parenthood, that may offend the school's predominantly Catholic community. For that reason, the paper does not accept any advertising.

In the independent youth media area, Maureen Mullinax, Project Director of the Appalachian Media Institute at Appalshop, a Kentucky-based media arts program that works with the schools, has encountered local controversy. After students created the video documentary—"Through Their Eyes: Stories of Gays and Lesbians in the Mountains"—a partnering school discouraged its students from further participation. Appalshop stood behind the teens that had created the video. "Although I did not want to lose the partnership with the school," says Mullinax. "I told them that the bottom line is that we support the voices of the young people and that we feel it was an important issue to explore." In fact, although the video has won raves from all over the country and is being used in HIV education classes elsewhere, it cannot be seen in the schools of its local community.

Mullinax is realistic about the restrictive school environment. She says, "A lot of the work we do is very political, very activist. So a lot of the tapes that the young people make are challenging, like about water being polluted from coal companies. The schools are very political here and the coal interests are very much represented, so the work that we do during the school year tends to be a lot tamer and not as challenging as what we do in the summer."

At HarlemLive, a web site created by teens in NYC, the young people make all content decisions themselves, but within the process of ongoing editorial discussions and feedback from the staff. Richard Calton, Director and a former teacher emphasizes the difference between his experience at HarlemLive and his work in the schools. He notes, "The kids run everything [here]. It's really up to the students what runs and what gets pulled. If they make a decision that gets them some flak it's part of the learning process and in a way that's safe—they're not getting fired."

He adds: "These are the future voices, learning to be heard. They need to learn and experience what it's like to express themselves. We say we are a nation of free speech but it's getting harder and harder to practice."

Related Links: