Law, Ethics, and News Literacy
I didn't know the difference between libel and slander until junior year
My journey of interest in press law and freedom began, like many, at my first NSPA conference. Specifically, a Student Press Law Center (SPLC) workshop.
There, I stumbled into workshops that taught all about the First Amendment, defamation, copyright, etc. It was a moment that showed me just how complicated journalism (especially student journalism!) can get in the terms of the law.
But it also showed me just how much power and support we have.
(And that I can take an insane amount of notes in a short amount of time.)
so many matcha lattes <3
"I got six pages of notes out of that. Full, Google Doc , 11 font, single space pages." - Me, NSPA Vlog 2022 5:45
✨The notes✨
This is my only photo from that class.
For context, the woman in the back in Ms. Chapman, my advisor, who taught the class. And that busted looking water bottle is actually my mom's that I stole and then proceeded to accidentally run over with her car moments before publications.
Publications in Practice
Contrary to many schools, we don't have any publications class to inform and accompany our work on the paper. All of the work that we do is purely extracurricular and student-run, and we have to use our "WIN" and "Lion" periods, which are typically used for teacher office hours, to do work together on campus.
So, put plainly, most of us know very little about what we're doing. As reporters, we get one or two opportunities a year to learn about the specifics of journalism (ledes, nutgrafs, how to interview, AP style, etc.), but they aren't mandatory and don't dive into any topics such as news history, precise grammar, ethics, law, and other components that make up this process.
During my sophomore year, Roar's advisor, Ms. Chapman, told us on staff that she was starting up an "Intro to Publications" course at our school, and that there weren't many sign-ups, so she wanted us to join. If we joined, she said, we would be relatively exempt from the content of that class and get to use that time to come together and work on the paper and receive elective credits for it. My co-editor and I decided it would be helpful to have more time to work on the Centerfold, and a couple other members of staff joined as well.
That semester, yes, we did skip a lot of the content because we wanted to dedicate that time to working on the paper, but on the occasion that Ms. Chapman forced us to stay, it was incredibly interesting. Thankfully, I had taken a couple of workshops during NSPA, so I was primed and ready.
We didn't understand Copyright laws
During our second issue of the volume, Matan and I had written Fragmented Generation, and for our design, decided to pull photos on the internet to make a photo-illustration demonstrating the desensitization of Gen Z to war.
Key phrase: pull photos on the internet
Typically, we try to avoid taking photos from the internet to accompany articles, but when we do, we simply credit the source with a, "photo courtesy of _____" and that usually works. So on the back, we included a list of the sources for each photo we included.
But when we first got to NSPA, we were learning about copyright and the usage of online photos in the SPLC's workshop, it turned out that we were actually breaking copyright laws despite having the sources page because we didn't a) ask for permission or b) pay for the photos. We showed Mike Hiestand, our leader for that workshop, and when he saw the cover page, his face genuinely dropped in horror, and immediately said, "You absolutely cannot publish this. Is this published already?"
It was published 5 months prior.
Desperately, he started giving us solutions: replace all of the photos with ones we have permission to use and update our internet presence as much as possible, go back to the sources of the photos and ask for permission or pay them money, or take down the cover across all of our platforms.
He advised us that the first option was the most optimal, so we decided to go with that route. And then we ended up not doing it because we forgot by the time we got back. To this day, the article's front cover remains uncontested.
But we got really lucky. Despite having a known presence within Newton and the student-newspaper community, we are so insignificant as to allow such an error to slide. If we were a larger paper, who knows what kind of liability issues we would be in? In those tumultuous 10 minutes, I realized that newspapers are more than just words on paper. We carry an incredible amount of weight and have to be held accountable for our actions.
PLEASE don't report us. We learned from our mistakes. I promise.
Along with that, the main spread design that we used for Fragmented Generation was based almost exactly on the New York Times format. Because we copied pretty much everything that makes the NYT distinct, it is a pretty significant infringement of Chapter 13 of Federal Copyright Law: Protection of Original Designs.
Along with that, on the right is our Volume 39 staff merchandise, which I had thought of the idea for the New Yorker format. Unfortunately, the senior staff at the time took my suggestion. Our graphics manager had made a new design to make the New Yorker's "Eustace" into a lion (Leona). I love the design so much; however, when Mike saw us wearing that, with the Fragmented Generation cover and spread, he was (not shocked), but quite disappointed. Yet another infringement of Chapter 13, I'm afraid.
Thankfully, he said that the New York Times and the New Yorker probably have bigger things to worry about then suing a student newspaper from Massachusetts.
I sure hope so.
These also weren't allowed
After years of NSPA's telling us to utilize SPLC, I finally did. This winter, we published 4 anonymous narratives in the opinons section giving their take on sex and what it means to them. One of the narratives compared sex and other physical expressions of love to that of an instance of domestic violence. Again, anonymous.
After the article had been published, as we expected, the sex article gained a lot of traction. But while students were fascinated by the awkwardness of some writers talking about buying condoms for the first time, and speculating who might've written each perspective, the school's administration focused on the violence.
As the EIC with greater connection to school administration and who more actively oversaw the article, I was summoned for questioning regarding the article and who the author was. Despite the byline stating anonymity, they wanted me to reveal who the writer was so that they could follow up with them as mandated reporters.
However, I knew the writer personally, and let them know of the situation. When they said they didn't want their name to be revealed, I stuck by them and was adamant in this. Worried that I was going to be pushed further, I contacted SPLC in order to prepare.
I got in contact with Mike Hiestad, who informed me on the specifities of my and the reporters rights. In addition, he also provided helpful insight on remaining firm in my stand against it, and gave me suggestions on how to completely clear the name from the source and mitigate any spread of who the writer is.
I implemented all of his suggestions and prepared for a fight with my administration. And then the Israel-Hamas War exploded in our school.
SPLC — Israel-Palestine
The response we got from our Israel-Palestine article was among the scariest I've ever seen. I fully knew it was going to happen, but the scale with which it did was upsetting.
During the same conversation I had with Mike for the Sex article, I let him know of the situation at our school and the fact that we were planning to report on it. He responded with the fact that 4 of his other calls that day had been regarding that, which was interesting.
He wasn't able to give a whole lot of advice. His main recommendation was that we had to be perfect. With this article, we knew we had to treat it with the utmost of respect, but when he told us, it became real.
And it became even more real when we officially got censored. On multiple fronts.
I talk previously of our informative article, and the fact that I was not well (you know, being a first semester senior on top of everything) enough to fight the demands that we take it down. However, we had also received information from our advisor that our bulletin board, which is where we post some of our featured articles, and in this case, the Israel-Palestine article, was gaining some traction and that people were looking at it. In response, she took down our article and replaced it with some safer articles, leaving the article only remaining on the website, because we did not fully distribute the paper issues.
I was infuriated by this, especially since we had just taken down and apologized for the informative article. I argued with my advisor quite aggressively about this, and she did the same back. Looking back, I could have handled that situation better; however, it was my attempt at salvaging what we had left.
Furthermore, my co-editor had recieved threats of physical harm over social media due to the article. After it went up,
I still have yet to determine whether my lack of initiative is valid or a regret in my journalism career.
(Left) The Israel-Palestine issue torn up and scattered on the floor. When I first saw this, I almost cried because I also say my "From the Editor's Desk" and thought that that was symbolic in some sense.
(Top Right) The apology published for the informational article.
The Hanson Case - Fig City
Last July, my classmate’s father beat his wife to death. The case shook our community, and as the only person on Fig City with experience covering delicate stories and with a connection to my classmate, I was consulted by the editorial board to decide if his perspective was to be covered. The decision was mine, and mine alone. Fearing that I would be responsible for further gashing an open wound, I said no.
This was one of the first times I had an ethical dilemma on whether it should even be covered. Journalists are supposed to be truthful and courageous in their reporting — did that case fall in this category? I don’t know whether he would have talked to me or not, but I didn’t try, so now I’ll never know.
I talked about it with the Fig City EIC recently, who believes I made a wise decision for myself, our readers, and for Fig City, a still relatively new newspaper at the time, to refrain from covering it.
Upon hearing that, I remember the pure pressure and stress of the decision. I made the call in the end, and its done, but I still don't know how I feel about it.
It is one of the most significant moments of my entire journalism career. Perhaps in my life.