in this issue
SUZIESMITH8
EARNING NOT LEARNING
6-7
DANCETEAM12 pantherprowler.org
PANTHER PROWLER Thursday April 2, 2015
Issue VI
Newbury Park High School
456 N. Reino Rd., Newbury Park, CA 91320
Student rights and student innocence Magazine sparks controversy in community
Addressing the Issue - While the public listened intently, Grace O’Toole and Courtney Brousseau, the Co-Editorsin-Chief of the Panther Prowler, spoke to the CVUSD board of education at their meeting on March 17 about the controversy surrounding the recent annual magazine edition that was published on Feb. 27. Samantha Meyer/Prowler
A Heated Debate - More than 200 community members watched as different opinions and perspectives were presented during the public comments section of the board meeting. Samantha Meyer/Prowler
Victoria Juan DPS Editor, Alyssa Boedigheimer Staff Writer, Nevnit Gill Features Editor, & Haley Berardinelli Features Editor At their meeting on March 17, members of the CVUSD school board considered an action item proposed by member Mike Dunn. The action item would “request” that the Panther Prowler print a front-page “uncensored rebuttal” written by parent Garry Pace, along with a picture of his choice in response to the Feb. 27 magazine cover spread “Sex: Undressing the Issue.” After hearing from more than 40 community members, students, Panther Prowler staff, and parents who spoke at the meeting, the school board members had the opportunity to share their own thoughts on the item. Following the discussion, Dunn amended his action item to change the writer of the rebuttal to a student instead of Pace. In the end, the board voted against the motion with Board President Betsy Connolly as well as members Pat Phelps and Peggy Buckles in opposition, and members Mike Dunn and John Andersen in support.
Student perspectives The school board vote came after many voiced various opinions on the cover article “Sex: Undressing the Issue” after the Panther Prowler distributed a special edition magazine on Feb. 27. The article discussed the emotional, religious, educational, legal and social aspects of sex, also covering the personal stories of several students who have had sex. “I was shocked that the Prowler would (print) something that bold. Then I found out what the magazine was really about … so I read it, and it was amazing,” Chelsea Crall, senior, said. However, while many students and parents, such as Crall, found the article informative and relatable, others were offended by the pictures and subject matter. “My issue wasn’t with what was printed, it was that I didn’t get to say whether I wanted to see that or not,” said Adam Hedelund, senior. “I don’t think I couldn’t handle it, but I did think that (my parents) should’ve been able to see it,” agreed Anna Everett, sophomore. “I don’t really think it should have been published because I don’t know if students should have been talking about it. I don’t really know if students should be the ones informing other people about this kind of thing. I think it’s more of an adult responsibility, because they have more experience.” Junior Jingjing Wu, on the other hand, believed that the article was well-written and was relevant to high school life. “I did believe (the article on sex) was written pretty respectfully and objectively, and it put all the views on the table,” Wu said. “I think it was a pretty good idea to (cover sex), because it’s so prevalent in American culture, but for some reason it never comes up at all - the whole adult to student conversation.” Crall was initially unaware of how sex affects her peers.
“(The article) made me realize how much I didn’t know,” she said, “so I think it was very helpful and beneficial to me personally.” However, there were a few who felt that the article’s content overemphasized stories of those who had sex and did not focus enough on students who chose abstinence instead. “I felt like a lot of kids were justifying their actions with a lot of positives, and almost none of them had said that they regretted their decision,” Everett said. “I think there should have been more people (covered) who had stayed abstinent and how that has made them happier. I feel like it was reflected in the article that a lot of people (have sex) but that isn’t really true.” Some students also felt that the distribution was too aggressive or forceful, leaving them no choice as to whether or not they wanted to discuss the issue of sex or view pictures of condoms. Hedelund suggested that the magazine should have a paper cover warning readers to read further at their own discretion, while Everett suggested it should have only been distributed at the quad, and not the gates. However, Co-Editors-in-Chief Grace O’Toole and Courtney Brousseau disagreed that the distribution of the magazine was aggressive. “When we distribute, students can choose whether or not they want to take a copy,” O’Toole said. “We talked with the staff before distribution to ensure that they were respectful and considerate when offering magazines to students.” “For each of our issues, we print 1,000 copies for a student body of over 2,500,” Brousseau added. “We only want to give our publication to those students who actually want to read it.”
everyday magazines or even on TV commercials,” said Julie Freeman, current parent of an NPHS junior. “I personally think that the students at the school have the right to print what they want within reason … for a high school newspaper for high school students, I think it was well within (their) rights.” Michelle Cooley, parent of TOHS students and an aunt of NPHS students, felt that the article avoided the harmful physical effects of having sex, especially regarding sexually transmitted diseases, and suggested a district-level “combined STD party” as a follow up to the article. “Because of the Prowler Magazine, I am concerned about the health and safety of our minors (and) district-sponsored sexual harassment of our minors,” she said. “It’s an expensive endeavor, putting the District at risk for lawsuits and making school a hostile learning environment.” At the board meeting, two of the three authors of the article, juniors Shreya Chattopadhyay and Kellie Levine, addressed the Prowler’s motivations for featuring teen sex. “Our purpose in writing it was not to promote an agenda of any kind, nor was it to represent our personal opinions,” said Levine. “Rather, the goal of the article was to shed light on an issue that we’ve seen affect our peers again and again but have never seen truly addressed in a way students can relate to.” But Pace feels that, “even if the writers thought their motives were good, the pictures of the condoms were in very poor taste. In addition, the pictures of a boy and girl removing each other’s clothes were more than suggestive and the cover picture of the article was lewd.”
forewarning, believing that they should have been able to give explicit permission to allow their students to view the magazine. Some even argued the magazine, especially the photographs accompanying the article, were pornographic and a form of sexual harassment. “The Prowler Staff … forgot to consider those students who might have been offended by the pictures and words the article published,” said Garry Pace, father of NPHS graduates and current grandfather of an NPHS student. “There were many students who felt offended, and their rights to be free from sexual harassment at school may have been violated.” On the contrary, other parents believed that the entire issue was appropriate and important, especially when students are of high school age and are bombarded with sexual content every day. “I feel like there are far more pornographic pictures in
Acorn, the Ventura County Reporter, and the Student Press Law Center. The Acorn also received several letters to the editors, both in support of and against the article. Principal Joshua Eby, Superintendent Jeffrey Baarstad, and all five school members received emails with legal and emotional complaints in the days following the publication. Although both Eby and Baarstad viewed and read the magazine before Feb. 27, they met with O’Toole and Brousseau after distribution to ask that they take the article off their website. Brousseau and O’Toole refused to remove the article from the website, standing by the article and the Panther Prowler’s right to publish it under California Education Code 48907, which gives student publications freedom of press under the First Amendment unless the content is legally deemed “obscene, libelous, or slanderous.” (continued on page 2)
Leading up to the meeting Parent reactions In the weeks after the article was published, the issue was Some parents were indeed dissatisfied with the lack of covered by the Ventura County Star, the Thousand Oaks