“A core value of being a journalist is to understand the role of the press in a free society. That role is to provide an independent source of information so that a citizen can make informed decisions. It is often the case that this core value of journalistic independence requires a journalist to question authority rather than side with authority. Thus, if the role of the press in a democratic society is to have any value, all journalists – including student journalists – must be allowed to publish viewpoints contrary to those of state authorities without intervention or censorship by the authorities themselves. Without protection, the freedoms of speech and press are meaningless and the press becomes a mere channel for official thought.”
Dean v. Utica Community Schools
345 F.Supp.2d 799 [E.D. Mich. 2004]

JEA Adviser Code of Ethics
Media advisers will:

• Model standards of professional journalistic conduct to students, administrators and others.
• Empower students to make decisions of style, structure and content by creating a learning atmosphere where students will actively practice critical thinking and decision making.
• Encourage students to seek out points of view and to explore a variety of information sources in their decision making.
• Ensure students have a free, robust and active forum for expression without prior review or restraint.
• Emphasize the importance of accuracy, balance and clarity in all aspects of news gathering and reporting.
• Show trust in students as they carry out their responsibilities by encouraging and supporting them in a caring learning environment.
• Remain informed on press rights and responsibilities.
• Advise, not act as censors or decision makers.
• Display professional and personal integrity in situations which might be construed as potential conflicts of interest.
• Support free expression for others in local and larger communities.
• Model effective communications skills by continuously updating knowledge of media education.

Additional information about prior review:

Why JEA condemns prior review
We believe prior review:
• Contradicts the school's responsibility to teach and maintain, through example, the principles of democracy;
• Enables school administrators, who are government officials, to decide in advance what people will read or know. Such officials are potential newsmakers, and their involvement with the news-making process interferes with the public's right to know;
• Creates the possibility of viewpoint discrimination, undermining the marketplace of ideas and all pretext of responsible journalism;
• Leads toward self-censorship, the most chilling and pervasive form of censorship. Such fear eliminates any chance of critical thinking, decision-making or respect for the opinions of others.
• Stifles growth of students so they do not grow into thinking, discerning, effective contributing citizens in the democracy;
• Impairs the ability of a school’s communities to discern the truth about the school and the accuracy of information citizens need to make accurate decisions and cast intelligent votes;
• Negates the educational value of a trained, professionally active adviser and teacher working with students in a counseling, educational environment. Prior review simply makes the teacher an accessory, as if what is taught really doesn't matter;

Instead, we believe
• Rights, not authority and discipline, prepare students for roles in a democracy as thinking, discerning, contributing citizens;
• Student media best serves their communities only when editorially independent as they present truthful and accurate information;
• Student media are safe and peaceful places a for dissemination of ideas, and with ideas there is no clear right or wrong; 
• Ultimate civic engagement and involvement only occur where students learn that they can practice constitutional guarantees;
• Responsible journalism occurs when a qualified faculty adviser, clear publications policies and professionally oriented journalism curriculum exist;
• Prior review interferes with the dynamic process of learning. Such review and censorship are the last resort of an educational system failing its present and future citizens.

Try these steps instead of prior review
By Vince DeMiero
Here's what the savvy, thoughtful administrators with whom I have had the privilege of working have done during the past 21 years instead even mentioning prior review:

PRE-PUBLICATION:
• Understand the role of a free and responsible press. Administrators need to understand that they are like a super-mayor in a small city and the student press is the voice of the citizens. If students don't have a voice and forum they can trust as being independent, then naturally they will mistrust all persons of authority in the school/small city. The principal cannot be mayor/editor/public relations officer/publisher/etc. in a democratic society. The principal cannot be the primary news source and gatekeeper of information.
•  Hire a qualified journalism teacher. When I was interviewed I actually said these words: "I am not interested in advising a public relations tool of the administration. I am, however, deeply passionate about creating an excellent journalism program that produces a real student newspaper." The principal, assistant principal and English department chair agreed and hired me. We understood each other from day one.
•  Feed the media. Savvy administrators know what stories they'd like to see in the paper and often can have stories and issues addressed through student media that would be difficult for them to deal with. Everybody else sends the paper press releases and news tips, so why can't administrators?
•  Don't be strangers. Set up regular meetings. They can be brief and powerful. Keeping lines of communication open is critical. Be a good source. Create a professional environment where administrators can be interviewed. Give student editors your cell phone number and e-mail address. Ask student editors for their cell phone numbers and e-mail addresses.
•  Create their own publication/Web presence. Make a point of clearly establishing a publication that is from the administration's point of view. Parents, students and community members will better understand, then, when the student publication reports something very
different from the administration's perspective. More speech is always better than preventing speech.
•  Collaborate. At our school, the student editors even afford the principal his own column in the student newspaper so that students can get as many different perspectives as possible in their own publication. The ASB officers have their column, too, in order to represent the official student government perspective. These columns frequently differ in terms of their approach to decisions/issues/etc. That's healthy, I think.
•  Support. Send student editors to summer workshops. Make sure students can attend their state conferences and national conferences. Provide an adequate stipend for your adviser. Invite in guest speakers. Maintain journalism in your curriculum. Find ways to instill American democratic ideals and an appreciation for the First Amendment throughout your school.
•  Objective oversight. Establish an advisory board that critiques and provides professional feedback to the journalism program and publication. Have the group meet twice a year and be available to meet if something urgent arises. Maintain the group in an advisory role only. Make sure that the small group is made up of folks who share your philosophy and vision for a free and responsible student press. Perhaps invite a retired journalist, a parent, an alumnus, a current student, a teacher, etc. to sit on the board. Make sure they're properly educated, too, in press rights and responsibilities. At our school, there is a wonderful district-wide advisory group that meets to support and critique all forms of student media and related curricular programs. We meet twice a year in the evening and provide them with food and beverages.

POST-PUBLICATION:
•  Meet with editors and the adviser. You know those regular pre-publication meetings? Also use them to reflect on the previous publication. Knowing that every issue of a publication is going to be scrutinized and critiqued by the administration is healthy, I think. So, instead of just having these meetings after something troublesome is published, just plan on doing it regularly. This is so much more healthy and professional that reacting only when there is controversy.
•  Keep feeding the media. Talk to reporters. E-mail the editors. Didn't
like something? Let them know. Liked something? Let them know. They
missed something? Let them know. Disagree with a columnist? Let them know. Hold student journalists accountable by asking for clarifications/corrections in the next issue.
•  Forward all phone calls and e-mails. Sometimes parents or community members will call the school thinking that the administrators are in control of the student press. Kindly instruct your office staff to simply forward all such phone calls or e-mails to the student editors. Maybe even write a script for the receptionist that simply states: "At XYZ High School, student editors determine the content of their publications. If you have a concern, compliment or suggestion, we strongly encourage you to directly address the student editors. Please hold while I transfer you to their extension."

Questions to ask those who want to review

Because of a recent outbreak of situations affecting advisers’ jobs, JEA suggests anyone faced with prior review ask administrators the following questions:
• How does prior review help students learn and advisers practice journalism?
• What is the purpose of the review? To prevent misinformation? To protect the school's image? To enhance student learning? To provide accurate information to the school's communities (including voters)?
Which of the reasons given for review are educationally valid, fitting within Hazelwood’s framework?
• What happens after review? Deletion of all or part of a story? If deletion, or telling students to remove copy or change it, how does this affect the truthful and accurate reporting a school’s community should expect from its media?
• Would this review be better carried out by students trained in journalism? What skills (and motives) do administrators bring to the review? How does review affect the school's curriculum, especially student learning? Does review provide the lessons curriculum intends?
• How does administrator review of student work affect the school's liability? Does administrative or faculty review, since the reviewers are agents of the state, reflect our democratic traditions and heritage? Does review change how community members perceive the truth?
• Isn’t there a better way?

JEA understands not all advisers are permitted to practice without review and restraint. We understand it is often hard for teachers to fight it. We know the pressures that can be brought to bear on jobs. All we ask is advisers and teachers do the best they can to show the educational weakness and lack of logic in prior review. We know teachers sometimes have no choice, no alternative.

It is up to JEA to try to create one.