As Louisiana’s Grambling State University made national news the past couple weeks for student protests over deteriorating facilities and a shortage of qualified professors, a related battle with administrators is unfolding over how student newspaper editors are covering the issue, or not covering it.
Reeling from heightened media attention, angry alumni, protesting students, and scrutiny from press freedom groups, officials at the historically black university backtracked Monday from an initial decision to punish two student journalists for allegedly breaking the ethics code of the school paper, The Gramblinite.
Wanda Peters, the adviser at The Gramblinite, said that her decision to suspend the online and opinion editors of the newspaper were overturned by the university’s dean of students because she failed to follow proper protocol. “Both editors have been reinstated and are free to return to the newspaper immediately,” Peters said in a telephone interview Monday evening.
Peters had suspended opinion editor Kimberly Monroe for two weeks after the graduate student participated in a campus protest, although Monroe was not covering the event and told Peters that she attended the rally as a “concerned student.” David Lankster Sr., the Gramblinite’s online editor, was to be suspended indefinitely after he tweeted photographs of school facilities in decay and statements by anonymous sources using the Gramblinite’s official Twitter account.
The issue, Peters insists, is that the students did not follow the code of ethics they signed when they were hired, which forbid “involvement in campus events, politics, demonstrations, and social causes that would cause a conflict of interest, or the appearance of such conflict.” The paper’s code of ethics also instructs student editors and reporters to “clearly label editorial analysis and expressions of personal opinion.”
Instead of participating in a rally, it would have been more appropriate for Monroe to have expressed her opinion in the following week’s paper, Peters said. Will Sutton, the director of public relations and communications at Grambling, initially scolded Lankster for tweeting statements from anonymous sources. Sutton, a former president of the National Association of Black Journalists, said on Monday that he supports student journalists and encourages them to be more aggressive.
“We can disagree about sourcing standards, but I match mine up there with The News & Observer, The Philadelphia Inquirer, and others of high quality,” said Sutton via email after several fellow NABJ members questioned his earlier tweets. (Disclosure: I am a member of NABJ and serve as co-chair and vice-chair of policy of the association’s digital journalism task force.) Sutton said he had nothing to do with the actions taken against the editors at the campus newspaper.
The drama at the paper comes amid broader tensions at the university, simmering since the beginning of the school year. They came to a head last week when Grambling football players walked out of a meeting with college president Frank Pogue and students started a series of protests. State funding for the school has been cut 57 percent since the 2007-08 academic year, The Shreveport Times reports.
Though events at Grambling have been attracting national press, there is currently no coverage of the controversy on the website of the The Gramblinite, leaving Lankster’s tweets as the only source of student-generated news about the turmoil. When asked about the missing reporting from the paper’s website, Peters said she discussed story ideas with a few of the students, “but what they produce is another story.”
If Monroe and Lankster’s suspensions had been carried out, they would have violated the students’ rights, according to Student Press Law Center Attorney Advocate Adam Goldstein. Starting Monday morning, several calls and at least one post on the center’s Facebook page alerted advocates that Grambling’s student journalists needed help.
“I’ve rarely encountered a school so outright committed to violating students’ rights,” Goldstein said of the public university on Monday afternoon. “This is exactly what it was: government silencing dissent in the most heavy-handed, nauseating way possible.”