It’s happened again.
You may remember that I wrote back in August about a series of collegiate media adviser terminations. The unfortunate trend continues.
Another adviser became victim last week of what appears to be censorship by termination.
East Carolina University officials fired Paul Isom on Jan. 4. Isom’s termination comes two months after The East Carolinian ran a series of photos on Page 1 of a streaker at a football game. The photos, published Nov. 8, garnered local and national attention. Administrators said at the time that the photos were “in poor taste.”
Isom, who worked at the university since 2008, received no reason for his termination. This has led to speculation that he was fired because of the streaker photos. Read a full post about the firing, including an email interview with Isom, on Jim Romenesko‘s blog. NOTE: The streaker photos are at the top of this blog post. If you’re going to be offended by putting this story in context, don’t click the link.
School administrators use adviser reassignment or termination to censor students or communication their stance on student media decisions. The ironic part of the terminations is that students, not faculty, are given constitutionally-mandated control of content in independent student media. In other words, advisers are being punished for decisions students make.
As I’ve written before, university administrators must recognize the importance of free expression, especially in the academy. As U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Duggan pointed out in Barber v. Dearborn, students benefit from the marketplace of ideas.
“Students benefit when school officials provide an environment where they can openly express their diverging viewpoints and when they learn to tolerate the opinions of others.”
University administrators also must understand that free expression is protected for all speech, not just that with which they agree. As Nadine Strossen, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union, famously said:
“The notion of neutrality is key. You cannot have freedom of speech only for ideas that you like and people that you like.”
Finally, university administrators must understand that student medias’ purpose is not to promote the university or make it look good to the public. This is the function of public relations, not journalism.
Let’s Talk Nerdy!
What do you think of universities terminating collegiate media advisers for content concerns? Is this a justified response to student media content concerns?
NathanHatcher says
This is really disappointing. It irritates me whenever “higher powers” attempt to censor journalism. Who is to judge what is in poor taste? And, don’t they have a sense of humor? Streakers are hilarious.
profkrg says
@NathanHatcher I’m not sure if I agree with the humor aspect of the situation. However, I do think it is campus media covering a campus happening. You know that everyone was talking about this event. We (journalists) don’t make the news, we just report it. If they wanted to discipline someone to prove a point, they should have addressed the streaker.
KoriCasey says
Independent student media are run by students, not the faculty. So it is really unfair that the adviser got fired because of an event the students found newsworthy. If the administration had a problem with the story, I think the first step should have been to talk to the editor of the paper about it rather than just start firing people for “no reason.”
profkrg says
@KoriCasey I also think it would be important to talk to the editor in an informative way. In other words, to attempt to understand why the student media ran the photos or to voice their concerns, but not to bully or intimidate, which is too often the case.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Kori.
AllisonGappa says
It is definitely easier to argue that Isom shouldn’t have been fired. However, I have to wonder Isom’s involvement with the photos and whether he advocated for their publication. The fact that he still has the pictures on his blog and it states, “A newspaper adviser was fired on Wednesday, and he’s pretty sure it’s because of these photos” says to me that his intentions were indeed to cause a stir without much consideration of the consequences. Since this isn’t the first time the newspaper received negative attention, the question is if the paper was close to the line of sensational journalism that began to lack credibility. The amount of national attention he has gained for himself, the newspaper, and his students is brilliant, but it came at a high cost that it appears he wasn’t quite ready to pay. @profkrg
profkrg says
@AllisonGappa Allison,
The photos you saw through my post were not on Isom’s blog. They were on media critic Jim Romenesko’s blog. I just wanted to make sure you knew that.
It is true that advisers many times have input on student media decisions. We hope that students look to us for advice when they have concerns, and that they listen to and follow our voice of reason and experience. However, it is just that, advice. I am uncertain that the students sought Isom’s advice on this issue. If they did, they are under no obligation to follow his advice (Not that he would have encouraged them not to run the photos. It was, after all, a news event).
I don’t know Paul Isom, although I have seen him at conferences for a national media advisers’ organization of which we are both part. However, I find it unlikely that this is any kind of a attention-getting measure on his part. No adviser wants his/her students censored by his bosses. Ever. To be fired because of a student media decision is an adviser’s nightmare. I believe Isom has been a collegiate media adviser for 15 plus years. I am positive that he would rather be advising students as they report the news instead of making the news himself.
This is a great example of how real student media really are.
I appreciate your perspective.
Kenna
mlarsh says
The first photo of the streaker was “in poor taste” as the administrators said. A bar could have been placed over his private part to make the photo less offensive. The role of the adviser is to advise the student journalists. The adviser may influence decisions or give constructive criticism in the newsroom, but doesn’t ultimately make the decision. Islom should not have been fired. This newsroom could have avoided this scandal if they had used Bok’s Model. They should have asked themselves, “Is there another professionally acceptable way to achieve the same goal that will not raise ethical issues?” and “How will others respond to the proposed act?” (Media Ethics Issues and Cases). Using the Bok Model and communication in the newsroom will help to avoid the undeserved firings of advisers. The responsibility ultimately falls on the Editor-in-Chief of the newspaper. In my opinion, he should step down.
profkrg says
@mlarsh Mary,
I was pretty much with you until you said that the editor should step down. Here’s why:
The students said they ran the photos because they were documenting a news happening. This is, after all, their job as the student media. If that is the case, we would need to consider whether they should alter the photo in any way. We’ve certainly had some interesting discussions (in ethics class) about altering photos and what is/isn’t acceptable. My general stance is that you shouldn’t print it if you feel the need to change it or hide it. Therefore, I am not a fan of the black bar. However, it certainly is an alternative.
More importantly, I disagree that the student editor should step down. If the editor was just reporting a news happening, why should the editor be penalized? It’s not his fault that the student streaked at the game. He doesn’t make the news; he reports it. This seems like a classic example of “shooting the messenger.” However, I agree that the editor should be able to support the decision to have run the photos. It’s important for student media practitioners to understand why they make the decisions they make.
Thank you for your perspective. I love that you pulled Bok from ethics class!
Kenna
alexkeown says
@profkrg no, your tweet was the first I sae about it