Editors await board response on press freedoms

Since March 10 when the MCCCD Governing Board questioned the oversight of district student newspapers, student editors have kept a watchful eye.

At the March 10, MCCCD Governing Board meeting, the topic of oversight came up because of a political cartoon that the Scottsdale Chronicle ran Feb 11.

The cartoon in question is of President Barack Obama on his presidential mountaintop, staring off to the distance at a much larger mountain of expectations. He has a coiled rope around his arm.

Some people believe placement of the rope made it appear to be a tail. Because his back is turned in the cartoon, the definition of his head is all that you can see. Those who emailed a complaint to the Chronicle interpreted the climber as a monkey.

"Pictures and words are in the eyes and ears of the beholder," said SCC President Jan Gehler. "It doesn't matter how I feel. What matters is how the readership hears and sees what is presented."

The cartoon is no longer the focus. The issue at hand now is oversight of student publications.

Recently the public elected two new MCCCD board members, Debra Pearson and Randolph Lumm, who began their term Jan 1. Lumm directed a question to the board about how much oversight is given to the Chronicle.

Carl Couch, vice president of Administrative Services, said, "Because we have two new board members, we have individuals who haven't benefited from having experience other than being students themselves at some point," said Couch. "They haven't had the experience of being able to know how a college newspaper is run," Couch said.

According to Kyle Patton, managing editor for the Chronicle, who attended the meeting, it was board member Debra Pearson who said that she was tired of the ongoing First Amendment discussion in today's newspapers. The board then asked legal counsel a question in the meeting about control over the college newspapers since they (the board) oversaw the budget. That was when concern over the First Amendment rights of the students arose.

According to most Supreme Court decisions over the past 40 years, even though the board votes as a whole on how taxpayer dollars are used in an institution, it cannot control the content of the newspaper.

"Any time students attempt to express themselves, it is their exercise of the First Amendment. A newspaper, English paper, magazine, poem, a person singing on campus with a guitar-the moment anyone questions whether or not any of that should be controlled, it becomes a violation of the constitutional right," said Patton.

Many people have expressed concerns that control of the newspaper or any student publication infringes upon the First Amendment.

Joe Russomanno, associate professor of the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at ASU, is an expert on free speech. ?

"Freedom of the press means freedom from government control. Decisions about what to publish in a newspaper, including college newspapers, should be only in the hands of those who operate the papers," said Russomanno.?

In the 1969 case of Tinker v. Des Moines, students planned to protest the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. They asked students to wear black armbands to peacefully protest. School officials became aware of the plan and suspended participation. The court ruled in favor of the students' right to peacefully protest, upholding their First Amendment rights both on and off campuses.

Since that landmark case 40 years ago, there have been more than 60 federal cases where a policy-making body has attempted some level of control over student press rights and free speech. Only a few decisions have gone against student First Amendment rights; 60 cases have upheld those rights. ?

Kasia Michalik, editor in chief of the Scottsdale Chronicle, is learning from this experience. ?

"I am definitely learning a lot about rules and laws of student press," said Michalik.?"I hope it gets resolved without going to court. We have people who will stand up and back us up, back up the First Amendment."

Board member Debra Pearson said, "For this subject to still be so emotionally alive causes me concern and questions as to the maturity, integrity, professional ability, conduct and motive of anyone stirring the students up and causing them unnecessary fear and concern," said Pearson.

"If by subject she means the First Amendment, then yes, it is alive, and rightfully so. Anytime a governing body even raises the question of what kind of control they have over a free press, alarm bells are going to ring in the ears of anyone who values their freedoms," said Patton, adding, "As far as her questioning the ability of hard-working student journalists in the district, I could only recommend that she partakes as a member of a student-run newspaper before she judges their integrity. I am sure that would be a learning experience for anyone who was not aware of the First Amendment and its importance in this country."

"We have written editorials to notify our readers of what's going on. We are meeting and gathering ideas on what we will do if this goes in the direction of court," said Michalik.?

"If the board monitored the paper I would be less intrigued to read it," said SCC student Nicole Newman.??"I like to read what my peers think is important. I just don't think it would be as interesting because I'm not sure that the board would be able to relate like my fellow students can."

As of the time of printing, the board hasn't given its response to reports on oversight it requested from all college presidents with publications. The next scheduled board meeting is Tuesday, April 28 at 6:30 p.m..