Tanning
THE
3
HOSA
7
Death Rays
9
16
Winter Guard
VOICE
FEBRUARY 2019, VOLUME 5 ISSUE 4
VOICES OF THE MOVEMENT Legislators Fight for Statewide Freedom of Speech free ride for anyone that was willing to fight for the cause. After his opening statement on the bill, Morfeld slowly turned around, asking all students’ who intended to testify as proponents of the bill to raise their hands. As over twenty young men and women across the chamber eagerly shot up their hands, one could see a slight sparkle in Morfeld’s eye. “I thought the testimony, or testimonies I should say, were great today, and all of the support we received was tremendous,” Senator Morfeld said. “I think the opposition testimony made it clear that they were not ‘completely opposed’ to the whole concept, as they showed me there are still some small facets of the bill that need to be worked on.”
Protections and Questions
Art by Isabel Mancilla
By Ben Randall COPY EDITOR
T
Senator Morfeld and Warner Chamber
he sun filtered somewhat lazily through windows hidden by nearly century-old architecture, casting a pale natural light on the Warner Chamber of the state capital. Fingers drummed on desks, hushed voices spoke hurriedly, and looks were exchanged as a figure made its way to the head of the chamber. Solemnly shuffling papers, while handing the courtroom page her desired testimonial copies, the figure prepared to utter words that had been bottled up for over thirty years. This figure was both young and old, both female and male, and saw both sides of the story; this was no figure, surely, rather it was a mob of students from Nebraska and beyond, who uniformly walked up to the table to fight for their rights. On Feb. 1, Nebraska students’ voices would not go unheard. “Well, the passing of this bill would completely change the landscape of student journalism in Nebraska,” Legislative Senator Adam Morfeld said. “It would provide protections that currently are not in place, and oftentimes are required to be able to publish the truth.” The bill is named LB206 and signifies the beginning of the end for administrative review in Nebraska. By definition, the bill claims to provide protection for freedom of speech and freedom of the press for student journalists, additionally protecting these students from their administration. In subsections of the bill, schools are granted immunity from anything that a student writes, while the student righteously takes full responsibility for their writing, both owning it and dealing with the consequences. This emphasizes a huge change in the nature of journalism within school systems, as schools that operate as a closed forum, or in a prior review system, are legally responsible for everything a newspaper or student writes and releases. With the passing of this bill, the students take charge. “This is my second year fighting for the bill,” Senator Morfeld said. “But I’ve always wanted to introduce it the past four years I’ve been in legislature.” Senator Morfeld was like a train conductor for all journalism students’ of Nebraska, paving the path and offering a
A
s the hearing commenced each proponent of the bill offered a new story, a unique viewpoint or sometimes just validation of support. One can quickly start to wonder about the implications of this bill; On one hand, the school systems fork over editorial powers to their journalists, while on the other hand, journalists finally get to utilize their given rights of the First Amendment. At both the state capitol and throughout the school systems of Nebraska, questions arose. “If you put something out there that’s slanderous, or potentially libel or critical, then what?” video production instructor Mr. Dave Stastny said. “We’re going to start suing parents? Like if you come out to say, ‘Mr. Stastny is selling poisoned milk to school children,’ am I gonna go sue your parents for slandering my name? I don’t understand the legislation.” He is not alone. While many students testified on behalf of their rights and what they were striving for, it is incredibly possible that no one entirely understands the consequences of this bill on both high and post-secondary schooling. The passing of this bill would give full responsibility to student journalists, simultaneously within their writing and their conduct in opposition to questions of their writing. One thing is clear: the errors, mistakes and altogether experience that students would face if they held full responsibility for their journalism would only help the future of journalism. Mistakes, different twists on story-telling and ethical decisions are foundations of great journalists, and this bill certainly doesn’t fail to underestimate that claim. “At the end of the day, you have to balance the desire to let students express themselves,” Mr. Stastny said. “We do this while trying to let students tackle
difficult, controversial issues with the fact that anything that gets produced is also a reflection of the school.” The number one criticism of the opposition to the bill was from the perspective of school administrators. If a student were to write something that was hurtful, yet still under the guidelines of not being false, libel or slander, then the already-slippery slope gets an extra sheet of ice. “I think if all restraints are off, it would change the atmosphere, and I’d be hesitant on this,” principal Mr. Roger Miller said. “If there are no restraints at all, some students will write without a care [about] what happens. The concern with that is if something happens, it’s the administrators and teacher that has to clean it up. If social media comes after the student, I won’t let them go after them. I’m always going to understand both sides.” If something does come up, or Mr. Stastny actually manages to poison the milk of young children and a journalist writes about it, the sheer fact of the matter is that none of that responsibility is on the school system. This bill both serves as an act of justice and preparation for the future world of writing. At a young age, our media and journalism will face hardships with learning how to handle their own accountability for what is said and distributed. A failure to realize how to write unbiased, politically correct and moral stories will decide the future of journalism. Back in our court chamber, a particular student came a long way to step up to the mic. “I think our school will implement this bill if it is passed because our newspaper has been around for a very long time,” North Platte senior Kylie Hannah said. “They will do this because they don’t want the bad attention coming to them about taking away the paper, because our journalists will retaliate against them, and draw even worse press their way if they decide to take away our voice.”
Kathy Kuhlmeier; The Future of Journalism
A
fter both sides were heard, the LB206 hearing concluded and students, senators and lawyers alike shook hands and chatted about where journalism is going in our country. As the rubble cleared, a notable figure stood out: Cathy Kuhlmeier, a former East High School (MO) newspaper member and part of a monumental court case in Hazelwood School District versus Kuhlmeier. In this case, the court stated that schools may govern what can or cannot be produced by any publication associated with the school. The high court ruled that material that is ungrammatical,
Teaming Up Students from all across Nebraska collaborated with teachers, elders, and senators alike to fight for LB206. Senator Adam Morfeld (middle) poses with his supporters. Photo by Theresa Randall
I’m Where it Started Cathy Kuhlmeier, Hazelwood court case opponent and full-blown censorship veteran, smiles with Ben Randall. 31 years ago, she fought against administrative review just as students are today. Photo by Theresa Randall
poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane or unsuitable for immature audiences are all characteristics that are worthy of censorship from school administration. “I’m where it all began,” Mrs. Kuhlmeier said. “I can’t say that as a seventeen-yearold journalist, I could’ve ever fathomed going through what I went through, but hearing all of your struggles, and your great speeches, it all came back to me. I’ve walked that walk, and I don’t want anyone to go through that again. I want people to write and be at peace with what they’re doing and not worrying about what the repercussions could be.” As a former leader of her high school newspaper, Mrs. Kuhlmeier faced similar circumstances today’s student journalists face. Her staff attempted to produce stories dealing with teen pregnancy and divorce. The principal cited that the stories were a violation of the student body’s right to privacy. Adamantly, the school paper claimed that the principal violated their First Amendment rights, and the case slowly but surely moved its way through courts to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1988, where the court ruled in favor of the school district. Thirty-one years later, sitting in that vivacious courtroom full of kids fighting for what she fought for at one time, Mrs. Kuhlmeier is justified in saying that ‘she’s walked the walk.’ Walking out of that chamber, the student journalists were virtually floating through the elegant chambers that inhabited the capitol building. Broad smiles lit up their faces, and journalism instructors giddily talked with Senator Morfeld about everything that had happened. While the official verdict is yet to be announced, Kuhlmeier’s words certainly bring to light an astounding triumph: the incredible support from our state’s young people. Whether or not this bill passes, the future of the journalism and laws of America is in good hands with this generation of determined, smart and persistent young men and women.