When we cover emotional, political, or personal topics like our staff editorial on ICE's entrance into Minneapolis, 'No Kings' protests, or the case of Abrego Garcia's deportation, we make sure to take the necessary precautions to prevent poor journalism. For example, when I wrote about the deportation of Abrego Garcia and President Trump's violation of the Constitution, I made sure to triple-check my sources, only write statements that I could back up with evidence and data, and most importantly, I kept it mature.  Of course, I also make sure that I, or any other staffer, runs these stories and columns through me, my co-chief, and then our advisor as many times as is necessary.

Especially when interviewing students we know less about, sometimes stories can get personal. My staff and I need to know how to delicately and competently handle these situations. One example is when we interview students about illnesses, we usually cannot speak with educators about it because of their legal obligation to student privacy. We also must make sure to get approval from the student and their parents to cover the story and to interview other people close to the topic. Personal issues and stories are tough to divulge, so it is very important that we are transparent and tolerant of the interviewee's stress, concern, and vulnerability around a topic. Also, if in an interview a student says something threatening to others, we cannot keep that private. If there is a concern for others' safety, which has happened before, we must notify the appropriate personnel.

Most of the time, as a journalist, I do not need to redact or limit a person's name, but there is the occasional story where it is necessary for the safety or job security of the interviewee or their family. Obviously, this has its limits, but one example I can give is when I went and photographed the North Charleston 'No Kings' protest. I took pictures, but I also conducted mini-interviews to get quotes for captions. In two of these interviews, I had to either omit or limit names. The first was of this trio of ladies in inflatable animal costumes, and while I got a quote from one of them, the other two were federally employed, and for fear of losing their jobs, they refused to give their names. In the other case, it was a kid who only gave his first name, because he feared reprimand or bullying from peers if people could find his full name, and thus the school he attends.

As a staff leader, the most important part of journalistic ethics and literacy is making sure the rest of your staff knows what to do. As a leader, you will tend to know more, and so it's important to remember that your staff doesn't have the experience you do. Preparing them for stories ahead of time is very important, but that's only half the battle. Because there are situations where they won't know ahead of time that they might need to flex their ethics muscle, making sure they keep working it out through practice and education is essential. To do this, our staff spends part of the first two weeks of school going over ethics and best practices. We also encourage or assign students to go to ethics classes at NSPA and SIPA. I also make sure they all can contact me in case of an emergency.

Part of strong journalism is knowing that you don't always know the answer, and others might. When I have questions, I don't hesitate to ask my advisor, because the worst case is that I don't ask about something, assume my approach is correct, and then practice bad journalism, which places me,  my interviewee, my advisor, and my staff in danger. Part of learning from the best is also being an active participant at conventions like SIPA and NSPA. Our staff is required to attend classes and learn from long-time advisors and journalists, from whom we can all learn so much. Further, the best way to know what good journalism looks like is to read it! I personally read from The New York Times, The Post and Courier, The State, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal - and I encourage my staff to do the same.