Brief #9: College Media

The phrase "college media" can mean many things, from student or university blogs, to social media posts, to the school newspaper or TV studios. I decided to focus my post on U.S. college newspapers (many of which are online-only, like our own "The Bray").  I knew very little about college newspapers, so this was an interesting fact-digging assignment for me. I worked on my junior high school paper in 9th grade, and I drew some cartoons for my school paper in Palomar Community College in 1980. I wrote some articles for The Bray last semester. I've been at many universities, due to my husband's job, and some of their papers were good, and some not so good.  Other than that, I know zilch about school papers. Video

From what I've been able to tell with my online research, today's college newspapers face three main challenges: whether to keep printing or move online entirely (or to blogs and social media); how to get funding in the face of budget cuts; and facing censorship. Video

Unlike professional newspapers, school papers are usually funded by the university (via student fees), or they have advertisers, or both. These papers are always free, so they can't charge a subscription fee. Our paper here at SAU pays the students for articles and photos, which I was surprised to learn. I thought school papers were either put out by a particular journalism class, or they were run by volunteers (like a campus club), which is how papers are done in high schools and middle schools (at least, as far as I remember). On the other hand, many colleges no longer have journalism degrees or even journalism classes. Our major is "Mass Communication" and focuses on online media and PR as much as journalism. However, the writers and photographers of the school paper are not necessarily Mass Comm majors. Video

I was shocked that university papers are having financial cutbacks because I thought they were well-supported by the colleges. Apparently when colleges try to cut costs, the school paper budget is one of the things they do slash. I suppose if a school paper is not popular with the students, and not well read by others in the community, and there is no Mass Comm or Journalism degree, they shouldn't charge students extra money for it. That makes sense. Unfortunately, I think that funding is cut even when the papers have many readers.

Many school papers stopped printing an actual paper and have gone digital. Sometimes it's because of printing costs, but also it's because today's students are more comfortable with digital newspapers. Also, today's students tend to be environmentally conscious, so it makes sense that they would rather not kill more trees or have to recycle newspapers instead of having a digital paper (even if going digital is not necessarily any more ecologically-friendly.) Some college newspapers are using social media to help bring in more readers. Video

I was even more shocked to learn that some college administrators try to control what the newspaper talks about.  Here at SAU, the administration has a "hands off" policy when it comes to the paper. The paper isn't even hosted on the SAU website. It's completely independent and student-run. The advisor only advises and doesn't tell the editor or reporters what to do.  The first amendment is alive and well here in Southern Arkansas.

 College newspapers also vary widely in their writing styles, resources and circulation numbers.  Top universities like Harvard train their students in newspapers and magazines that are very similar to real-world major newspapers. Some colleges have moved their operations entirely to blogs or social media. I suppose that's the wave of the future in student newspapers. Video

Brief #5: Reporter's Privilege

Learning about Reporter's Privilege  and Shield Laws

 

I'd never heard of Reporter's Privilege, but it's apparently very similar to shield laws. Reporter's Privilege is "the right of a reporter to not testify about confidential information or to reveal his or her source."  There are certain rules or laws in the U.S. that everyone should uphold, including the courts. These are not just based on constitutional law, but on basic human rights. A reporter's right to protect their source is as important as the priest's right to keep the confessional secret, or doctor-patient confidentiality, or lawyer-client confidentiality. These may all differ slightly, but in each case, the professional (in this case, the reporter) must have that legal protection in order to get the information from their informant. Otherwise, many sources would not come forth. They would not be able to trust that the reporter would keep their name private.  News sources must be protected, or else the person leaves him/herself open to reprisal from co-workers, bosses, police, criminals or worse.  The system works because the reporter is able to get the information without revealing who told the information. Without that protection, they would not be able to get the story or tell us the important news. Reporters would be leaving themselves open to prosecution and could incur many legal expenses.   These press freedoms are the cornerstone of our democracy.

Most of the courts in the U.S. have upheld reporter's privilege.  Only the fourth circuit federal court of appeals, which is based in Richmond, VA and covers District of Maryland and the Eastern part of North Carolina, has said that it doesn't exist.  Nonetheless, there are always lawyers, police, government employees and judges seeking to subvert reporter's privilege every week, like this reporter in San Diego.  This happens in other countries all of the time, too.  Last week in Canada, they tested a new law there to protect reporters from revealing their sources.  Many other Western countries besides the U.S. and Canada have shield laws and freedom of expression.  However, these laws have qualifiers and are not absolute, and there is no federal shield law in the U.S.  Those are two of the many reasons that the reporter's privilege and shield laws are always being challenged.   I couldn't find a list of the countries without shield laws, but this list of countries from the World Press Freedom Index helps us determine which countries treat journalists the worst (which probably includes lack of shield laws or reporter's privilege).

Although reporter's privilege has been around a long time, it's only been addressed by the Supreme Court once, in Branzburg v. Hayes.  This case in 1972 decided that "in federal courts, a reporter may not generally avoid testifying in a criminal grand jury."  The judges declared that the press did well enough without the constitutional protection. However, they did maintain that the only time a reporter can be compelled to testify is if the testimony is aligned with "overwhelming and compelling state interest."  Many courts have interpreted this to mean that reporter's privilege does exist, except in rare cases. We won't ever have a completely free press until the courts declare that reporter's privilege exists, without exception, or we have a federal shield law. For the most part, it appears that many reporters in the U.S. act as if these things already occur, since they routinely face jail for not revealing their sources. Others are more cautious and do reveal their sources. As I mentioned before, reporters can also face breach of promise law suits if they don't maintain confidentiality.