Where journalism is concerned, there is no gray line when it comes to censorship. There is “freedom of the press” and then there are the actions of others in authority who would subdue that freedom. Whenever Big Brother does step over the line, we are all there reporting and crying foul. But in the case of New Jersey’s Montclair University newspaper versus their own Student Government Association, the newspaper is in the wrong.
Apparently, the Montclair State University’s SGA, led by SGA President Ron Chicken, froze the newspapers’ funding when Karl de Vries, editor in chief of The Montclarion, refused to release correspondence between the paper and an attorney that was retained to advise them.
The SGA provides approximately 1/3 of The Montclarion’s funding, and therein lies the seed of destruction. Ethics are subjective, but the unwritten rule of journalism ethics is to never accept financial backing or support from a possible source, which for a school newspaper, the SGA predominately is. The Montclarion’s Web site states that their student newspaper is a “Media Organization of the Student Government Association, Inc. of Montclair State University.” Meaning that their newspaper is somehow an extension of the SGA.
It was going to happen sooner or later. Vries’ actions are both provocative and deplorable. They used money supplied by their SGA to retain an attorney to advise them against the SGA.
Such an action was completely unnecessary. There are numerous organizations and agencies available to college newspapers that offer legal advice at no cost. How could their SGA not take offense? Of course they took action against the newspaper.
While censorship is wrong, the staff of The Montclarion tied their own noose. Although they provoked this, it’s important to note that this is a situation of students censoring students, a scary ground that requires observation and careful consideration.
The school administration, which is usually the culprit in school censorship cases, yet not in this one, has allowed the situation at Montclair to continue, reportedly because it is an opportunity for learning. Why should readers care? Like it or not, news agencies are a source of information that wouldn’t exist were it left to the common laymen to ask questions. Even at the college level, we provide a service of supplying the public with information that we find newsworthy and hope that our readers do as well. The issue of censorship arises when journalists are prevented from publishing, but we cry out when it is the truth, for better or worse.
In this case it’s for worse. Yes, The Montclarion is being censored by their own SGA, but they placed themselves in that position and provoked it.
The Montclarion is obviously outraged by their predicament. Since then, they have bathed in the limelight of the U.S. national press’s response, publishing their own articles admonishing their SGA. However, these articles lack balance.
The bottom line is that responsible journalism suggests that they should not have placed themselves in such a position, but now that they are there, they should conduct themselves with dignity and be willing to admit their mistakes. If they wish to take legal action against the SGA that funds them, then quit crying foul and find revenue somewhere else.