COMMENTARY: The importance of understanding (and respecting) press freedom at learning institutions
Firstly and most importantly, prior review is a form of censorship.
The National Scholastic Press Association says prior review is when someone in a position of authority – in our case, at a university – outside of the editorial staff of a student publication demands that they be allowed to read copy prior to publication.
Years of case law maintain that prior review at the college level is unconstitutional. Despite this, staff, faculty and administrators on this campus routinely try to demand to review content prior to publication. For the most part, this occurs because sources are uninformed about the concept of prior review.
Many demand prior review because they are concerned about being misquoted, their story misrepresented, or otherwise misunderstood. While these concerns are valid, reporters come prepared to interviews, as is their ethical and occupational obligation. Asking a reporter to review their work may seem innocent enough, but it’s actually incredibly disrespectful and indicates that a source does not trust them – and by extension, the editorial staff – to do their jobs properly.
The editorial process
Although imperfect, The Signal adheres to a strict editorial process to ensure accuracy in reporting. After every interview, our reporters write their first draft and submit it to the editorial staff. The Editor-in-Chief and Executive Editor edit the first draft, checking for accuracy and relevance of information in the content, adherence to AP style, grammar and spelling.
These edits result in a rewritten draft, which is submitted for a final time and reviewed by editors before reporters may move their story onto our website as a post. The Managing Editor of Content and Operations fact checks the rewritten drafts and resolves any inconsistencies between reporters and relevant sources.
Then, each story is reviewed by the Online Editor, who sends reporters any corrections that need to be made to their story on the backend. After online edits are completed, the Editor-In-Chief reviews the story a final time before publishing.
This rigorous editing process consistently allows our publication to publish accurate content, but it is not always failsafe for one major reason: we are all still learning.
UHCL is a learning institution, after all, and we are all student journalists and editors. As such, we are not ashamed or afraid to admit when we make mistakes and to issue corrections with a note from the editor. This is also part of the learning process: making mistakes, identifying them, troubleshooting them and resolving them properly and transparently.
While I am continually puzzled by the reluctance of some staff, faculty and administrators at UHCL to trust students to learn by practicing and even making mistakes, it is imperative they recognize their responsibility in being prepared for interviews and providing reporters with clear and accurate information about the topic of any interview they may be a part of.
How to engage with student journalists
Just like reporters prepare for interviews, those being interviewed should prepare too. This allows a source to provide any and all pertinent information about the topic that they wish to provide the reporter. Then, if the reporter has further questions about the specifics of certain aspects of the topic, give them the opportunity to ask them.
If necessary, ask the reporter questions before the interview about the topic. A source could ask a reporter for a sample of questions they will ask ahead of the interview to prepare, but no source is necessarily entitled to this. It is up to each individual reporter to decide what they may be willing to provide in advance for a source.
Staff, faculty and administrators at UHCL should eagerly participate in our coverage because interviewing, writing, editing and publishing digital stories is a high-quality learning experience preparing our reporters and editors to work in a variety of creative environments.
If and when corrections need to be made, sources should point out our mistakes and give us the opportunity to learn from and correct them. Another important point is that these mistakes shouldn’t make people reluctant to work with us again. If anything, our commitment to learning from our mistakes and making corrections where necessary is a testament to our dedication to telling these stories accurately.
Everyone employed by a learning institution should be prepared to facilitate learning experiences to the best of their ability, not attempt to disrupt them with prior review for the sake of quelling their fears about an experience that is not meant to serve them but to serve our students and audience.
