Dexter school board wrestles with policy governing student publications following newspaper controversy
More than a year after a controversy over The Squall, Dexter High School's student newspaper, prompted the Dexter school district to embark on a review of its policy governing student publications, the school board is still wrestling with the issue.
Board members Monday night discussed what the guidelines should accomplish.
Squall staff member Lisa Crompton urged board members not to make the policy too restrictive. "You should be able to write about controversial subjects," Compton said. "That's what a newspaper does."
Copies of The Squall, Dexter High School's student newspaper.
Angela J. Cesere | AnnArbor.com
In response, an anonymous group of parents launched an Internet blog called Clean Up DHS. The blog also complained about a 2008 issue of The Squall that published a picture from Rolling Stone magazine showing John Lennon and Yoko Ono nude. In addition, the blog complained about stories in the school newspaper about drinking and drug use as well as teenage pregnancy.
"I think there should be guidelines and oversight in our policy about content as well as distribution," said school board member Julie Schumaker. "We have a duty to supervise and protect children."
School board President Larry Cobler questioned how to go about setting general guidelines.
"You can't identify every topic that's going to come up so you have to have a process to make sure guidelines are being followed," he said.
Although the policy will ultimately cover all forms of student media, the high school newspaper took center stage Monday night. Squall staff adviser Rod Satterthwaite and newspaper staff members attended he meeting.
"Every year we look at the editorial policy and what revisions we need to make based on feedback that we've gotten, Satterthwaite said."Students meet with me about the angles to take and sources to use on stories. Many eyes see an article before it's ready to publish."
Satterthwaite cited an example of a controversial article about a pregnant student, who he said gave permission to have her name published.
"The topic isn't the problem," said school board member Dick Lundy. "It's how the kids are treated and how they're protected."
Parent Barbara Read agreed and told the board, "You have a range of students in high school from 13-year-olds to students who are legally adults," she said. "You say a 13-year-old can give legal consent, but do you agree with that? You have the authority to decide what you want."
Other concerns from board members included issues such as who's responsible for interpreting what defines vulgarity and obscenity.
Cobler recommended holding another policy meeting that will allow community members to participate. No date was announced.
Lisa Carolin is a freelance writer for AnnArbor.com. To reach the news desk, call 734-623-2530 or email news@annarbor.com. For more Dexter stories, visit our Dexter page.
Comments
Barbara Read
Thu, May 12, 2011 : 5:42 p.m.
@Mark You can probably find the answers to you questions here: <a href="http://mipamsu.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/NPReport2011.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://mipamsu.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/NPReport2011.pdf</a> I haven't looked through it much, but it seems there are between 10 and 30 entries for most categories and then just a handful for the last one on the list. Schools are grouped by division, so there are a total of 5 first place awards (divisions 1,2,3,4 & middle school), 5 second place, etc. for each category. Dexter would be winning these in it's own division, where there is one award at each level in a category up for grabs among 10 to 30 entrants. Hope this helps.
Mark
Thu, May 12, 2011 : 3:18 a.m.
"there's something fundamentally wrong with anonymously attacking . . . " So cooldexter is your real name and you are not anonymously attacking anyone? Good. Glad we cleared that up. Oh, don't get mad, I'm just pointing out the irony. Looks like this is something you care about, and I respect that. I think I remember you from the whole Dexter school bus issue. Tired kids, right? At least it's only a few more weeks.
CoolDexter
Thu, May 12, 2011 : 12:58 a.m.
I am a Dexter parent with kids in the Dexter schools. There are important details that may have been forgotten in this discussion. Last year's controversial "CleanUpDHS" campaign to install oversight on Dexter High's Squall newspaper was part of a coordinated effort by an area religious group. It involved - among other things - a blog, anonymous online comments, and repeated letters/comments to news publications. Here's a quote from last year's thread on this same topic - it's from Jim Carty (area journalist & Dexter parent, who strongly advocated for the paper's rights): "For anyone who has been to the school board meetings addressing this issue, it's very clear that this is a small group of people - most of whom don't have children in high school, many of whom are members of a very conservative church group - who are attempting to enforce their values on the larger community. They've even brought a clergy person to speak to the school board in favor of censorship." Last year's annarbor.com story about this topic - with 100 comments - is here: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/dextersquall" rel='nofollow'>http://tinyurl.com/dextersquall</a> Carty continued in his comments: "[H]opefully the parents behind CleanUpDHS - the poster Georgia above is one of them - realize there's something fundamentally wrong with anonymously attacking students and teachers, and the message they're sending in doing so is much more damaging than anything The Squall has done." If you compare last year's comments to those recently posted, some of the same usernames appear - including the aforementioned Georgia. It's too soon to say for sure, but it appears this religious group is back. Perhaps with the dire state of Michigan's public schools, they sense an opportunity. Last spring, a large group of Dexter parents and educators worked together to help protect The Squall (including taking out expensive advertising in the local paper). Hopefully, the school board will do the right thing and we won't need to go through this whol
georgia
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 5:40 p.m.
I do expect a certain standard of care for my children when I send them to school and the school is acting "in loco parentis." It should not be the lowest common denominator that sets the bar, e.g., "Well, most of them hear profanity on tv, and we don't want to deprive them of the right to use it in their paper." Really? Is that what school has come to? ------- Maybe Mrs. Marshall should sent an email note home informing parents that now the standard is set by what "most" kids are allowed to do/see/say at home. As in, "Hey younger kids, we know that your parents are setting limits on your home media use, but we can't deprive the older kids the right to publish more mature material on school time and distribute it at your school. You're just going to have to grow up, and we've decided to let the editors of The Squall decide how and how fast. We trust them, and so should you. "Oh and p.s. only what's not vulgar to 16 year olds will be allowed, so you'll be just fine." Mary Marshall, 5/11/11: "Our voices make a difference, and our silence indicates to them that we don't object to the direction they have proposed, a direction that will have a significantly negative impact on the quality of education we can provide for our kids."
Mark
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 1:06 p.m.
Elaine, Your point raises a question in my mind. If you can get armloads of awards, how meaningful are they? I'm not putting down the paper. I read and enjoy the Squall. I'm just saying in a scientific way, what exactly does it mean to get armloads of awards. How many papers were entered? How many awards are given? What are the requirements? How many of the entered papers get awards? What's the ratio of entries to awards given? If my son brings home a paper with an "awesome" sticker on it, I would be proud of him (and I should be). But if every student in the class got a similar sticker, then he's still great, but the sticker means something less. Before we say that these armloads of awards prove something, we really have to know what the parameters of the achievement are. I keep hearing this awards thing, and I don't really have a gauge for what it means. Again, not dissing the paper, I'm just saying . . .
Elaine F. Owsley
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 11:54 a.m.
And how do you tell a student newspaper that just picked up an armload of awards in competition with others that they are wrong.
Lori Sullivan
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 7:02 p.m.
For me, the problem is also protection--however, I think I have a different view. The Squall writers are not breaking the law, they are not dangerous to other students. So one person's idea of when students need to be "protected," from what they need to be protected and by whom and how, may be very, very different from my idea. Yes, your freshman daughter isn't like a senior, but there is nothing to stop her from bringing home the paper and discussing with you anything in it that bothers her. You as her parent, using your values can tell her to ignore these stories, or to engage in some way. I'm sure she will already have opinions based on the values she has learned at home. That is where your protection of your child should happen. I may choose to have the same, or a very different discussion with my daughter or son about a particular topic covered in the Squall. I happen to agree that drug dealing isn't a good choice of occupation and that story lead to a very enlightening discussion in our home about the prevalence of drugs at DHS and what my kids decide to do when they find themselves in certain situations. This is a public school. This journalism program has achieved national success with a very dedicated advisor who spends a great deal of time talking with his students about their responsibilities. If you feel so strongly that your children should be "protected" from these topics, I will respectfully suggest private school where your values can be taught as part of the curriculum. But please don't feel that because you are a tax payer and the Squall uses school funds, that you can impose your values--your idea of "protection--on all students. It doesn't work that way. And I find it very interesting that this issue was tabled many times over the past year and has just resurfaced now AFTER the school board elections. It does make Julie Schumaker and Dick Lundy, who are for the first time becoming vocal on this issue, seem rather cowardly.
Barbara Read
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 2:54 p.m.
You seem to be making this an "us" and "them" situation. Shouldn't we be working together toward a solution that is best for all the students? I think that's all Julie and Dick were saying. Were you at the meeting yourself? If not, you might consider coming. In person is different than reading select quotes later. Lisa wrote an accurate article, but there was a lot going on at the meeting that you'd miss by just reading about it later. It's been on their plate the whole time and the safety/privacy concerns have been referred to since the beginning. The policy is just working through the bureaucratic process. Having sat there week after week, I can assure you, Lori, that you are reading something into the timing that just isn't there. It has been a painfully slow process and will likely continue to be based on the complexity. Kim Covert said awhile back that there aren't 4 choices, but hundreds of them, depending on how you match the pieces up.
recordhound
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 6:01 p.m.
Isn't the opposition just a single woman with a lame website? My understanding is she doesn't even have children in the high school, and probably doesn't have a clue about the level of maturity or information that high school kids already have. Time to stop letting the religious-extremists of our community dictate policy. Her time could be better spent working on something important.
Barbara Read
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 5:36 p.m.
The last media policy lasted 10+ years, so it's worth taking the time to make sure the board is comfortable with what it chooses. Julie Schumaker made a good point about being responsible for all the kids at school, not just the Squallers. It's a great paper and definitely a part of the high school experience--let's keep it that way. I'm just asking for responsible reporting--and some consideration for the youngest students at the high school, one of whom will be my daughter next year. Like Linda said, she will leave the high school a different person than she went in, but what's okay at 18 is not the same as what's okay for 13, 14 or 15. There's a gap there. (And @Karen Collins: pornography is not necessarily "obscenity," so with the proposed Gross Pointe policy, the students could legally include pornography, and without prior review, it would be a case of "ask forgiveness, rather than permission." Not that they WOULD, it just opens the door for that kind of thinking. That's what makes this such a complex issue. Somehow the board has to look into the future and anticipate possible misunderstandings. I wish them luck. They have a tough job.)
Barbara Read
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 3:14 p.m.
Thanks, Mark. I'm like you. I think it's important to understand what things really mean--practically speaking. I do notice that the definition does not make a distinction among the minors' ages. Any parent could tell you that freshmen and juniors are dealing with different issues and are at a different level of maturity, even though they would both be given the same consideration under this heading. It's worth thinking about.
Mark
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 3:09 p.m.
@ Barbra, here's what it means: OBSCENE AS TO MINORS Material or a performance is "obscene as to minors" if it depicts a prohibited sexual act and, taken as a whole, it is harmful to minors. For purposes of this subdivision: (A) "Minor" means any person less than seventeen years old as used in section 53a-196 and less than sixteen years old as used in sections 53a-196a and 53a-196b, and (B) "harmful to minors" means that quality of any description or representation, in whatever form, of a prohibited sexual act, when (i) it predominantly appeals to the prurient, shameful or morbid interest of minors, (ii) it is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable material for minors, and (iii) taken as a whole, it lacks serious literary, artistic, educational, political or scientific value for minors.
Barbara Read
Wed, May 11, 2011 : 2:43 p.m.
Thanks. I'd like to see the actual definition of what "obscene as to minors" means. The board meeting was the first time I've heard that particular phrase. I'd be interested in learning more about that distinction.
Andrew Taylor
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 9:31 p.m.
@ Barbara Reed I am the adviser to the student newspaper at Grosse Pointe North High School. You raise a good question, but I want to assure you that the Grosse Pointe policy does not allow students to legally include pornography. You are correct that legally "obscene" is not same as "pornography." However, the Grosse Pointe policy includes the wording "OBSCENE AS TO MINORS." This is a far more restrictive legal standard and is appropriate for a school. What it means is "depicts a prohibited sexual act and, taken as a whole, it is harmful to minors." What may not be harmful to an adult can be deemed harmful to a minor. In general, publication policies should place all power in the hands of the students and then limit specific types of speech in very limited ways. Give the adviser and the editors the policy and then trust them to follow it. That's what the Grosse Pointe policy does and I hope Dexter will follow. Here's an important passage from our policy in Grosse Pointe: "District administrators and teachers are responsible for encouraging and ensuring freedom of expression and freedom of the press for all students, regardless of whether the ideas expressed may be considered unpopular, critical, controversial, tasteless, or offensive." Sources: <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/obscene_min.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/obscene_min.htm</a> <a href="http://www.neola.com/grossepointe-mi/search%5Cpolicies/po5722.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.neola.com/grossepointe-mi/search%5Cpolicies/po5722.htm</a>
Barbara Read
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 5:32 p.m.
I agree with Dick Lundy that it's not the topics that are the problem. It's how the kids are treated and how they are protected. The Squall had a great article last year about teen pregnancy. It was well written, interesting and showed different points of view. Another article about chewing tobacco was much the same. People who chewed gave their point of view. Other people did, too. And the health issues were mentioned--how the nicotine gets absorbed, etc. It was informative and topical. The problem comes when an article like "Dirty Dealing" lands in the "jobs" issue telling how to sell drugs at the high school and get away with it (while making good money and having enough left over to use yourself). Where were the kids who don't do drugs? Where was the kid who did get caught? Where was the mom whose son left DHS a drug addict several years ago? I could give them her name if they are interested in including her thoughts. The only other "job" in the job section? Shoveling poop at a farm. Sure it's a funny juxtaposition. But it's not good reporting. It's not educational in the "school board" sense. And it should not have the seal of approval from the Dexter School District unless a teacher or administrator or advisor sees it first and says, yes, that is worth spending our money to produce. It is educational and good for the students. Of course the students can still write an article about how to sell drugs at school and publish it online or via hard copy, etc, but on their own time and with their own money. I don't think it's fair to the parents or students in Dexter to use district money to tell the student body how to sell drugs, make money and not get caught, which is exactly the information in that particular article.
Karen Collins
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 2:37 p.m.
Wow. Is Tipper Gore on the Clean Up DHS committee? It's not like the students are publishing gratuitous pornography. They seem to be discussing topics relevant to the student body. Not talking about issues such as teen pregnancy and drug use certainly won't make them go away.
Linda
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 1:32 p.m.
Wrestle is the right word. I have never attended a school board meeting before, but the discussion was very in depth, but very respectful and interesting. Except for one point when a board member grilled another board member in such a way that made me feel uncomfortable, but then they moved on to other things. The board seemed to take its responsibility seriously and made good points. It's too bad the meetings aren't taped and made available to everyone. Then we wouldn't have to rely on the filter of other people's take on things. It was a really interesting discussion from all sides. I understood the different points of view and both seemed reasonable. How do you watch out for the new freshmen and still have the newspaper kids write what they want to write? They are really dealing with different things. Four years for a teenager is a lifetime, and they will leave the school different than when they arrived--no question about that. But for that 4 years, they co-exist with older and younger kids together at the school.
perfectly lubricated weather vane
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 1:14 p.m.
What constitutes a controversy? When three people anonymously express an opinion outside the mainstream, does that necessarily make the object of their objection controversial? The Dexter High School newspaper year after year receives recognition of its excellence from groups who read a wide array of high school newspapers. Those are the opinions I trust.
Moonmaiden
Tue, May 10, 2011 : 1:08 p.m.
Way to go Dexter, squash those kids now before they become independent thinkers!