What do you think of your landlord? How do you rate your professors? What’s the best and worst pizza joint in town? Reader surveys have become a popular and staple feature of many college newspapers. They can be informative, useful and entertaining. They often also provide information on local services, business people or products that no other media source is going to tackle. Unfortunately, such consumer surveys — particularly those about the bad landlords, the lousy professors or the cruddy pizza joints — can also be the source of some nasty legal problems — most of which can be avoided with extra care and effort.

Different surveys pose different levels of risk. In fact, when planning a survey, the issue that probably poses the biggest legal concern is whether your survey will be strictly a “ratings survey” or one where you will also include reader comments and/or additional staff reporting.

A survey that is purely based on numerical ratings or “grades” — as long as it is conducted fairly and reasonably — is the safest option. Such surveys skip the nitty gritty details of a specific problem or person and seek to provide readers with the “Big Picture,” an overview, for example, of all off-campus housing options and tenant experiences. Asking readers to rate their landlords and properties on a scale of 1-10, and then carefully tabulating and accurately reporting the results poses few legal risks (though, of course, you may still have to field angry phone calls from landlords whose properties or whose management styles have received bad marks.) Such subjective rankings would be treated by a court as opinion; and the law is clear that pure opinion cannot be the basis for a successful libel lawsuit. A landlord might be mad as hell and think it completely unfair that he received an average ranking of 1.5, but — absent hard proof of bad data collection or inaccurate reporting of the results — it’s pretty much “tough cookies” as far as the law is concerned.

Fairness is important — for legal, ethical and editorial reasons. If you have never conducted a survey, you owe it to your readers — and those being surveyed — to spend sufficient time learning how to do so fairly with the goal of obtaining the most accurate, unbiased results reasonably possible. That includes writing questions that do not lead or mislead, obtaining a fair sample of responses and accurately tabulating and reporting the results.

But while a ratings-only survey is generally safe, it can also be kind of boring and one-dimensional. Allowing readers to explain why they gave their landlord or professor a “2” (or a “10”) will usually make for more informative and interesting reading. But it also ups the ante considerably in terms of legal risk.

Once again, “pure opinion” statements made by respondents pose little risk. For example, a reader who says that “my apartment sucks” or “the professor is boring” isn’t saying much more than he did when he gave the subjects a rating of “1.” But the tenant who explains “my apartment sucks because the plumbing constantly overflows and the landlord has never responded to my telephone calls to fix it” is giving much more than his opinion; he’s reporting facts. And they are facts that are either true or false. That is, either the landlord never responded to complaints about an overflowing toilet, or she did. If evidence shows the tenant’s “facts” to be largely false, the landlord probably has a valid claim that her business reputation has been seriously damaged by the false comment and, if that comment has been published, that’s libel.

Moreover, if that comment has been republished by you in your print-based newspaper, that’s trouble for you — even though you’re just accurately repeating what was told to you by the tenant.

[A brief aside: If your survey is conducted and published entirely online, the law may provide important protections that may shield you and your news media organization from liability, even when that same “libelous” information — if reported in your print-based newspaper — could cost you dearly. Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act states that providers and users of interactive computer services (e.g., which most courts now agree includes Web sites) are not liable for posting information provided by other sources. For example, a student news organization that posts a survey online that includes a space for readers to post additional comments on their own should be shielded from liability for those comments — even if they are, in fact, false and libelous — provided the news organization itself played no role in creating the comments (for example, by a staffer rewriting the comments that resulted in additional libel). A full discussion of the CDA is beyond the scope of this article, but much more information is available on the Student Press Law Center Web site. Still, it’s lousy journalism to post sloppy or misleading surveys and/or to allow readers to unfairly and falsely trash a person’s reputation online simply because the law provides liability shield. Ethical journalism should generally be blind to the type of media in which it is published.]

If you include reader comments along with the survey, you have to treat those comments just the same as if you or your staff were reporting the information under your newspaper’s byline, because that’s pretty much how a court is going to treat it. That, of course, can present some real problems because — unlike a story written by a seasoned reporter you trust — the source for most reader comments will probably be someone you don’t know — or at least don’t know very well. And that’s not an excuse that will get you very far in court.

Every comment must be carefully read. If the comment is a factual claim that could cause significant harm to a person’s reputation — and harm to a person’s business reputation is high up on that list — you have some choices to make. First, you might choose not to publish the comment. That’s obviously the easiest and safest, but if you do that too many times the usefulness of the survey is going to be diminished. If a landlord, in fact, doesn’t respond to serious tenant problems or if a professor regularly misses lectures, it would obviously be a good and helpful thing for your readers to know.

If you want to publish the comment, you’ll need to do more work, which includes the following:

1. Evaluate the source. That, of course, means you need to know who the source is. Whether or not you publish the source’s name is both an editorial decision and one on which you may need to reach agreement with the source, but running potentially defamatory comments from an unknown source is a recipe for disaster, at least when there aren’t other identifiable sources available to verify the claims. Assuming that you have tracked down the source, you need to evaluate her credibility. Does she have a reputation as a liar? Does she have any reason to harm the subject? And, of course, if you don’t believe the source you absolutely don’t want to publish her statement.

2. Track down other sources. If a respondent claims that a professor makes inappropriate sexual comments to some students, you’ve got a whole classroom full of other potential witnesses to that behavior. Reasonable reporting demands that you talk with at least a few of them about their take on the professor before allowing the publication of such serious charges.

3. If a situation allows for it, use your own eyes. If a tenant claims that garbage is strewn through the hallways of his apartment building or that the laundry room floor is slimy, .get off the phone and away from the keyboard and check out the place for yourself. Take a camera. It not only makes for better reading, it’s good proof should the landlord start making noise.

4. Whenever possible, ask for documents to back up the claims. Perhaps the tenant has written letters to the landlord voicing his complaints. Check them out. Public documents are even better (much better.) If, for example, a reader says that a particular pizza joint is a “disgusting dive with cockroaches everywhere,” it’s probably worth checking with the local health department to see how the restaurant has fared on its health inspections.

5. Avoid namecalling. Publishing comments that call the subject of the survey a “slumlord,” “tyrant,” “despot,” a “drunkard,” a Hitler (don’t ever use that one — there was only one Hitler) or describing the property as a “turd-infested hole” (all of these are actual terms used over the years), etc., may or may not be protected speech, but they practically challenge the subject to respond.

6. Generally avoid drawing legal conclusions. Remember that neither you nor the survey respondent are probably lawyers. Terms such as “fraud,” “blackmail,” “theft,” “discrimination,” “harassment,” etc. have specific legal meanings. Just because a professor seems to single out “cute” students for special treatment doesn’t necessarily mean he or she is guilty of sexual harassment.

7. Finally — and most importantly — if you are going to publish factual claims that are going to seriously damage someone’s reputation (or the reputation of a business), you must provide that person with an opportunity to respond prior to publication. Not only does this establish an essential element of fairness, it also provides you with an opportunity to catch — or at least confirm — parts of a story that may be subject to debate or question.

In the end, you may find that publishing a reader comment is simply more work than it’s worth. Or you may find that it’s better treated as a “news tip” for a more traditional news story. Both are valid responses. Surveys can provide useful information, but their role should be limited and never confused as being an acceptable or safe substitute for diligent reporting when the subject demands it.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the “Lower 48,” and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.

Print Story of the Year will include the same categories as previous years: News, Feature, Sports, Diversity and Editorial/Commentary. There is a limit of one entry per category per member publication. Print entries will be mailed to ACP.

Multimedia Story of the Year will include three categories for content online: News, Sports, Feature and Photo Slideshow. Multimedia stories must utilize two of the following elements: Text, audio, video, photos or interactive components such as a map or timeline. Multimedia Story of the Year entries must be entered online.

The Photo Slideshow category replaces the Picture Story category of the Photo Excellence contest in past years. Photo Slideshows are comprised of photos and a caption for each photo, with a limit of no more than 30 images per entry. Audio enhancement will not be considered by the judging team. Photos should be well edited and sequenced in a way that tells a story.

The deadline for all of the following contests is June 7, 2010 (received, not postmarked).

Download the ACP Individual Awards entry form (for mail-in categories: Print Story of the Year, Reporter of the Year, some Advertising categories)

Go to the ACP Individual Awards online entry form (for Multimedia Story of the Year, Photo Excellence, Design of the Year, Cartooning, some Advertising categories)

Download paper entry forms for ACP’s Newspaper Pacemaker and Magazine Pacemaker contests.

Any questions on contest changes may be directed to Kathy Huting, ACP contest coordinator, at kathy@studentpress.org.

View the list of finalists

50 finalists have been selected in the 2010 ACP Online Pacemaker contest out of a total of 242 entries. The contest has grown dramatically in recent years, with 2010 yielding a record total of entries and representing an increase of eight percent from 2009.

In past years, entries for three of the categories were divided based on websites’ corresponding print publication frequency. In 2010, sites were divided into the following new categories: over 10,000 student enrollment, under 10,000 enrollment, online-only and other (magazine, yearbook or broadcast).

The contest was judged by a panel of professionals with extensive online media experience. Judges noted that the most successful sites displayed excellence in multimedia story telling, writing and editing, site design, in-depth and complete coverage, interactivity, and graphics and photography.

Online Pacemaker winners will be announced for the first time at the ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Louisville on Oct. 30, 2010. Comments from the judging team will be posted shortly after the convention.

College Media Matters aims to tell the story of the modern college media — information on influential, controversial, innovative, and newsworthy matters impacting contemporary college media worldwide. As sponsor, ACP will connect the blog with a wider audience, and the blog’s writers will have access to what’s happening in the field through ACP members. A feed of the blog’s posts will be featured prominently on the ACP website.

College Media Matters is written primarily by Dan Reimold, Ph.D., a college journalism scholar who has written and spoken on the issues and research related to the college press.

“I believe in the power of college media and the idealism and passion of student journalists,” Reimold said. “This blog aims to tell their story, as much as possible in their own words.”

The partnership comes at a time of change in journalism and especially in student media that face major challenges such as erosion of advertising, elimination of funding, administrative censorship, and the evolution of platforms.

“College Media Matters is a valuable resource because it raises awareness of these issues, highlights innovations and shines a light where some would prefer things be kept in the dark,” Logan Aimone, ACP executive director, said. “We need a news source like this to aggregate what’s happening in the specialized field of college media.”

For more information, contact Logan Aimone (612) 625-7359.

View the winners list

View video of the judging panel discussing criteria

55 ACP member yearbooks entered the 2009 ACP Yearbook Pacemaker contest, 14 of which were selected as finalists. Four judges with extensive professional and scholastic journalism experience traveled to Minneapolis in January to make the selections.

Judges considered the following factors when selecting the finalists: thorough coverage and content, sophisticated design, exemplary writing and editing and outstanding photography.

Entries were divided proportionately into two categories based on page count. After an initial cutting round, judges whittled the entries down to the top 14.
?Winners will be announced for the first time at the ACP/CMA Fall National College Media Convention in Louisville on Saturday, Oct. 30, 2010.

Law and ethics have a curious relationship. The law tells you what you can do. Ethics, on the other hand, is concerned mainly with what you should do. Fortunately, they usually work hand in hand. Indeed, one of the things I quickly discovered in law school is that you can pretty much guess what the law will be about 80 percent of the time — without ever picking up a book. If both common sense and the little person on your shoulder tell you that Path A is the one you should follow, chances are good that courts have come to the same conclusion.

What that means, of course, is that a lawyer invests three years of her life and spends gobs of money going to law school to figure out what to do in just 20 percent of her work.

Much of that 20 percent can easily be blamed on lawmakers and lobbyists who too often push legislation without regard to either common sense or ethics: they’re looking out for themselves. For the balance of cases, however, it’s usually more complicated.

Sometimes that’s because neither common sense nor ethics — or even greed — provide an easy answer. In fact, sometimes you find that the law tells you can or must take Path A, but your personal or professional ethics is saying Path B, or perhaps C, is the one you should stick to.

Because of the importance Americans have traditionally placed on a free press and the strong legal protections of the First Amendment, journalists probably confront more of these legal/ethical questions than most. The following are some of the more common.

(Note that in the discussion that follows, we’ll assume that censorship of the material by school officials is not at issue, only whether it can or should be published. Administrative censorship of otherwise lawful content is, of course, a big, separate topic for another day.)

Publishing minor names/photos. This is unquestionably the issue that most frequently raises a legal/ethics question for the reporters we speak with at the Student Press Law Center. As with most of the issues that follow, the legal answer to this question is actually pretty straightforward. More than 30 years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protects the right of journalists to publish the names/photos of minors in newsworthy stories as long as the information is “lawfully obtained” and truthfully reported. That is the same standard that applies to adults. So, in covering a bona fide news story involving a minor, your energy and attention should focus not on the law — where the answer is a clear “yes you can print the name” — but on whether or not publishing a minor’s name or image in a particular case is editorially appropriate and ethically sound. Many news organizations — following their own written or unwritten editorial policies — do not, for example, identify minors involved in less serious criminal conduct. The rationale is generally the belief that young people, simply because they are young and naturally lack experience or judgment, make mistakes and should not be stigmatized for life for something stupid they did in their youth. That makes sense. But it is not a decision compelled by law and it is not necessarily one that your news organization must accept as its standard operating procedure. There are big news stories — such as a school shooting or a brazen crime committed by the child of a prominent public figure — where many journalists would argue that publishing the name of the high school-aged suspect is editorially required and ethically justified. Though it may make your job more difficult, it is up to you and your staff — not a court — to figure out where the line should be drawn in your newsroom. (The Poynter Institute’s Al Tompkins has a useful checklist of factors to consider when making this decision. In fact, the Poynter Institute, a school and resource for journalists, is a great first-stop when confronted with any ethical question.)

Publishing victim names. As with the publication of minor names, courts have also generally upheld the legal right of news media to accurately publish victim names/photos in newsworthy stories. While some states passed laws prohibiting the identification of sexual assault victims, these laws have been routinely struck down as unconstitutional when challenged. So again, it is up to individual news organizations to determine when or if to publish such information. While many still do not publish victim names, particularly victims of sexual assault, some newsroom policies allow for the accuser to be identified where a case is dismissed or where the accused is found not guilty.

Publishing accident/crime/war scene photos or interviews. Reporters and photographers are regularly called upon to cover tragedy. Events such as a drowning or a deadly car wreck are news. So are murders, rapes, serious beatings and the like. So is war. In covering tragic, but newsworthy events, journalists often end up with images or stories that are hard to look at and hear in the newsroom let alone publish or broadcast for their audience. Still, in general, the law protects news media if they decide it is something their readers should know. Victims and the victims’ loved ones may be upset by the decision, but it is a tough decision that generally must be made by editors, not judges and juries.

Publishing controversial ads. Whether it’s an “issue ad” that promotes white supremacy or a risqué ad for an “adult toy” store or strip club, the First Amendment protects the publication of commercial speech as long as it concerns a lawful activity and is not misleading (and courts have traditionally allowed a fair share of leeway on this latter requirement). The ideas espoused by white supremacists or holocaust deniers, for example, are generally protected (the First Amendment protects one’s right to say stupid things) and sex toys are legal — at least for a college-aged audience. At the same time, as long as it is the student staff making the final decision, student media are under no obligation to provide an advertiser (or any outside contributor for that matter) space on their pages, website or broadcast. It is — lucky you — your call.

Publishing nudity. The law prohibits the publication of obscenity. But obscenity — contrary to what many believe — is not a descriptive term (as in “those photos of near-naked cheerleaders are obscene!”) It is a legal classification. And to be classified as legally obscene, material generally has to be very, very explicit. In fact, when speaking of material aimed at an adult audience (18 years old and above), obscenity is so explicit and so beyond what student media do that in my nearly two decades working with them, I’ve still only seen one example that maybe…perhaps… even came close (and no, I’m not telling.) Mere nudity — photos of campus streakers, spring break wet T-shirt contests and the like — does not constitute obscenity and the decision about whether to publish such material is an editorial call. (It’s also probably a financial call due to the number of readers and advertisers you might offend. But that, too, is separate issue.)

As a media law lawyer, I think I probably have the easy job. I get to tell journalists who call with a legal question either, “yes” you can legally publish such information or “no” the law will probably not be on your side if you do. Once my job ends, however, the really hard work actually begins.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the “Lower 48,” and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.

Thomas E. Rolnicki, former executive director of the National Scholastic Press Association, died Dec. 20. He was 60.

Rolnicki was NSPA’s executive director from 1980 until 2006. In his capacity as director, he wrote and edited several publications for NSPA and its college branch, the Associated Collegiate Press. He was a co-author of the journalism textbook “Scholastic Journalism.” During his career, he spoke at journalism conventions and workshops throughout the United States and internationally. He received the Carl Towley Award and Medal of Merit awards from the Journalism Education Association, the Gold Key from the Columbia Scholastic Press Association, and a Newspaper Fund Merit Award.

Immediately prior to joining NSPA, Rolnicki was editor of publications for the Office of Admissions at the University of Minnesota. He also was director of JEA’s Summer Seminar for teachers and other professionals. Rolnicki had taught journalism courses and directed summer journalism workshops at Iowa State University, where he also served as technical, editorial and business adviser for publications.

He had also taught journalism, English and photography and was adviser to student publications at two high schools, one in Iowa and one in Wisconsin. Rolnicki had served JEA as vice president and as Midwest regional director, and he had been treasurer of the Iowa School Press Association.

Rolnicki received his master’s degree in journalism and mass communication from Iowa State University. He received a B.S. degree in journalism and secondary education from the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

He was a native of Wausau, Wis., where funeral services are pending.

UPDATE: Visitation will be 9:30-11:30 a.m., Saturday, Jan. 2, 2010, at St. Ann’s Catholic Church, 700 W. Bridge Street in Wausau, Wis., 54401. A funeral mass will follow at 11:30 a.m. at the church.

The family is requesting memorial gifts be made in Rolnicki’s name to the Student Press Law Center. Condolences can be mailed to the family at the church or to his mother, Polly Rolnicki, 817 N. First Ave., Wausau, Wis., 54401.

Click here to view Rolnicki’s obituary in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

This new publication replaces ACP’s Guide to Internships. We discontinued that publication because so many media outlets had discontinued or cut their paid internship programs or the newsroom coordinator of the programs. We regret that we can no longer offer this guide, but the new freelancing guide does meet some of the same goals of helping college journalists gain experience in a media career.

Contact: Logan Aimone, executive director, (612) 625-7359

National Scholastic Press Association Board of Directors adds two members

MINNEAPOLIS (Sept. 28, 2009) — The Board of Directors of the National Scholastic Press Association (NSPA) has appointed two new members to its Board of Directors. The two new directors join nine directors. The new members have two-year terms.

Chris Ison is an award-winning journalist and a former reporter and editor for the Star Tribune in Minneapolis. He was the paper’s assistant managing editor for investigative projects for three years and won a Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting in 1990. He has won numerous national, regional and state awards. Ison was editor-in-chief at The Minnesota Daily at the University of Minnesota. Now, as an associate professor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Ison teaches public affairs reporting, news reporting and writing, advanced reporting methods and media ethics. Ison is one of three representatives from the University of Minnesota School of Journalism and Mass Communication outlined in NSPA’s charter.

David Therkelsen is currently the executive director of Crisis Connection, a nonprofit agency that provides crisis counseling by telephone. From 1978-2006, he served in a variety of senior management roles with the American Red Cross, including CEO of the St. Paul Area chapter. He holds a B.A. in journalism and political science form Metropolitan State University and the University of Minnesota and a M.B.A. from the University of St. Thomas. He also writes, teaches and lectures in journalism and public relations. Therkelsen has participated on NSPA’s Finance and Investment Committee for the past year and joins the Board of Directors as treasurer.

About NSPA
NSPA is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit membership organization headquartered and incorporated in Minnesota. Memberships for middle school, junior high school and high school student media are organized under the Minnesota High School Press Association division of NSPA. Memberships for college, university and professional and technical school student media are organized under the Associated Collegiate Press division of NSPA. Memberships are open to all student media at public and private schools at an annual membership fee.
Each division of NSPA provides journalism education training programs, publishes journalism education materials, provides media critique and recognition programs for members, provides information on developments in journalism and student media and provides a forum for members to communicate with others and share their work. NSPA and its divisions cooperate with other student media associations and other non-student groups and businesses that share its mission to educate and recognize the work of student journalists, to improve the quality of student media and to foster careers in media.

# # #

The ACP Newspaper Pacemaker contest has awarded general excellence in collegiate newspapers for 82 years. This year’s contest yielded 228 entries from across the nation and were judged by the Poynter Institute.

Entries were judged based on the following criteria:

• Coverage and content: Were all aspects of student life covered (academics/sports/clubs/local news, etc.)? Was the use of wire/syndicated copy limited (especially on pg. 1)? Was there evidence of sound news judgment?
• Quality of writing and reporting: Was the writing concise and the reporting thorough? Was writing free of opinion (with the exception of editorials or columns)? Was the copy edited for consistent style?
• Leadership on the opinion page: Did staff editorials, cartoons and letters supplement personal columns? Did the staff demonstrate sensitivity to controversial topics? Was the content of the editorial page consequential?
• Evidence of in-depth reporting: Did major stories show evidence of multiple sources? Are series or depth pieces prominent in entered issues?
• Layout and design: Was the look of the paper clean and contemporary? Was a consistent modular page makeup used throughout the publication? Did designers establish a clear visual hierarchy for readers?
• Photography, art and graphics: Did visuals enhance the verbal content and draw the reader in? Did visuals improve the reader’s understanding of the accompanying story? Were photos properly credited? Was the quality of photos and art technically excellent?

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/npm09.html

Places will be announced for the first time at the 88th Annual ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin on Saturday, Oct. 31. Comments from all judging teams will be published on the ACP website after winners have been announced.

Please contact Kathy Huting, ACP Contest and Critique Coordinator, with questions at kathy@studentpress.org.

Entries were judged based on the following criteria:

• Content: Was there evidence of diversity in content and approach? Were the works matched and grouped appropriately? Was the content innovative and contemporary?
• Quality of writing and editing: Was there evidence that the authors were well-read, creative, original and aware of the audience? Was the writing almost or completely free of grammatical and spelling errors?
• Photography, art and graphics: Did the photos have strong centers of interest, sharp focus and proper contrast? Was a variety of artwork and graphics represented?
• Layout and design: Did the design accentuate rather than dominate the content? If color was used, did it appropriately enhance the layout? Was overall design unity evident?
• Overall concept or theme: Was the theme clear and carried throughout the publication? Was the concept fresh and engaging?

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/mpm09.html

Places will be announced for the first time at the 88th Annual ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin on Saturday, Oct. 31. Comments from all judging teams will be published on the ACP website after winners have been announced.

Please contact Kathy Huting, ACP Contest and Critique Coordinator, with questions at kathy@studentpress.org.

The Story of the Year contest was co-sponsored by the New York chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, the Deadline Club. Entries consisted of a single story in one of the following categories: News, Feature, Sports, Editorial, Diversity and Multimedia Package. The entries totaled 656, with the largest increase from 2008 entries in the Multimedia Package category.

Judges selected finalists based on the following criteria:

• Value, importance or worth of story
• Quality of reporting and quotes
• Quality of writing and editing
• Credibility and leadership

Multimedia Packages were judged on the criteria listed above, along with innovation in use of multimedia (audio, video, slide shows, graphics, etc.), technical quality of multimedia elements and adherence to copyright laws.

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/story09.html

Places will be announced for the first time at the 88th Annual ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin on Saturday, Oct. 31.

—–

The Reporter of the Year contest recognizes individuals for outstanding writing and editorial leadership. The four-year category is co-sponsored by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services and the two-year category was judged by the Associated Press. Entries consisted of three single news or feature stories published in a college newspaper during the competition year. Winners receive cash prizes when announced at the fall convention.

Factors judges considered when selecting the finalists:

• Significance and news worthiness of the stories
• Quality and depth of reporting, quality of quotes
• Quality of writing, editing/AP style usage

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/reporter09.html

Comments from all judging teams will be published on the ACP website after winners have been announced in Austin.

Please contact Kathy Huting, ACP Contest and Critique Coordinator, with questions at kathy@studentpress.org.

The Design of the Year awards are co-sponsored by Adobe Systems and were accepted through online submission for the first time this year. Newsmagazine/Special Section Cover was introduced as a brand new category; other categories included Illustration, Infographic, Newspaper Page One, Newspaper Page/Spread and Yearbook/Magazine Page/Spread. The contest yielded a total of 440 entries.

First place winners in each categories receive software complimentary of Adobe Systems. Places will be announced for the first time at the 88th Annual ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin on Saturday, Oct. 31.

Judges selected finalists based on the following criteria:

• Effective use of photos, color, art, graphics and typography
• Established visual hierarchy
• News judgment for Newspaper Page One
• Contemporary appeal
• Suitability for respective audience

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/design09.html

—–

The ACP Photo Excellence contest is co-sponsored by the National Press Photographers Association and honors student photographers in five categories: General News, Spot News, Feature, Sports, Environmental Portrait and Picture Story. This is the second year that ACP has accepted entries through online submission. Entries are judged based on technical quality, artistic value and journalistic content. There were a total of 849 entries this year, an increase of about nine percent from 2008.

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/photo09.html

—–

Comments from all judging teams will be published on the ACP website after winners have been announced in Austin.

Please contact Kathy Huting, ACP Contest and Critique Coordinator, with questions at kathy@studentpress.org.

For the first time ever, the Cartooning Awards and three out of the five Advertising Awards categories were accepted through online submission. 172 total entries were submitted in the Cartooning Awards, co-sponsored by the Universal Press Syndicate, the largest independent newspaper syndicate in the world. Entries were accepted in two categories: Editorial Cartoon and Cartoon Panel/Strip. Winners receive cash prizes courtesy of UPS.

Places will be announced for the first time at the 88th Annual ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin on Saturday, Oct. 31.

Cartoon entries were judged based on:

• Reader impact
• Community importance
• Artistic quality
• Originality, clarity of message

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/cartoon09.html

—-

The Advertising Awards are co-sponsored by Sierra Nevada Media Group, which consists of seven newspapers and websites. Entries were accepted in the categories of: Display Ad, House Ad, Ad Campaign, Advertising/Editorial Supplement and Brochure/Rate Card. The categories combined yielded a total of 277 entries.

Advertising entries were judged based on the following criteria:

• Contemporary appeal
• Effective use of photos, art, graphics, typography and color (if applicable)l
• Suitability for respective audiences

View the list of finalists here:
http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/adv09.html

—-

Comments from all judging teams will be published on the ACP website after winners have been announced in Austin.

Please contact Kathy Huting, ACP Contest and Critique Coordinator, with questions at kathy@studentpress.org.

Best of Show winners, announced Sunday morning, are now available on ACP’s website.

On Twitter, the #acpsws hashtag and @acpress feed were both active throughout the event.

• Newspaper Pacemaker Entry Form
• Magazine Pacemaker Entry Form
• Individual Awards Entry Form

We’ve expanded the number of contests and categories where entries are submitted online as digital files, after a successful online-only Photo Excellence contest last year. To enter Photo Excellence, Design of the Year, Cartooning Awards and selected categories of the Advertising Awards and Story of the Year, go to this link:

http://acpcontests.studentpress.org/

The deadline to enter all of the contests is June 8 (entries must be recieved by that date). There is no entry fee for any of the contests, but publications must have a current ACP membership as of the contest deadline to enter. You can check your membership status here. Enter soon!

In a word this entry was outstanding. The writing was conversational and the transitions were flawless. The piece was both personal and informative, without being sensational.
 
The depth of research and the use of multiple voices was most impressive.
To have elicited such candor, honesty and raw emotion from the piece’s interview subjects speaks of superior interviewing skills. Excellent editing and production skills helped weave a bulk material into a seamless and well-told story.

It reminded me of the NPR.

Congratulations on the courage to tackle such a difficult subject and the telling of such an outstanding story.

The Associated Collegiate Press and the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial introduced the college print category of the RFK College Journalism Awards for the first time ever this year. “Divided Families” by the Cronkite Depth Reporting Class at Arizona State University was chosen as the winning entry. The judge, Allie Shah, of the Star Tribune, said the entry was “a powerful story, well-told and thoroughly reported. This is in-depth journalism at its best.”

The RFK College Journalism Awards, co-sponsored by the Associated Collegiate Press, honor outstanding coverage of the problems of the disadvantaged.

Entries may have included accounts of the lifestyles, challenges and potentials of the disadvantaged in the United States and around the world, including insights into the causes, conditions and remedies of their plight and critical analyses of public policies, programs, attitudes and private endeavors relevant to their lives.

The print and broadcast winners will each receive a $500 prize to be used for their respective journalism programs. Representatives from each winning organization will be sent to Washington, D.C. to attend an awards ceremony honoring student and professional work. Winners will also be recognized at the ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin in the fall.

Since 2006, the Associated Collegiate Press has provided its members with targeted job listings via AfterCollege.com, which connects college students, alumni and employers through customized career networks at colleges and professional organizations across the country.

ACP was one of the first national membership organizations to make use of AfterCollege’s technology, which was initially geared toward college alumni/career services departments, and in the three years since we began partnering with them, they have vastly improved in their ability to find the best jobs among their 200,000 listings for the 20,000+ college journalists at our member publications.

With another graduation/job hunting season approaching, we wanted to make sure our members were aware of this unique service. The site has been recently redesigned and allows students to create professional profiles and apply for listed jobs directly.

ACP/AfterCollege Job Resource Center

The 2009 ACP Online Pacemaker contest yielded approximately 45 percent more entries than the previous year, affirming that college publications across the nation are rapidly adapting to the steadily evolving world of media. The 223 total entries were divided into the following categories: Four-Year Daily Newspaper, Four-Year Non-Daily Newspaper, Two-Year Newspaper and Non-newspaper sites, including Broadcast, Yearbook, Magazine and Online-only publications.

The contest was judged by Ellyn Angelotti, Interactivity Editor for the Poynter Institute, a leader in online journalism training and education. Angelotti noted that the top sites displayed excellence in the following areas: Integration of multimedia and user-generated content; Navigability; Breadth of coverage, including in-depth reporting; Custom, clean design; Sound news judgment on the home page.

A full listing of the judge’s comments will be posted with the online gallery shortly after the Fall ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin in October. -Kathy Huting

View video of judges discussing selected entries:

Kathy Huting, ACP contest and critique coordinator, provides the following report on judging, with comments from the judges:

The 2008 ACP Yearbook Pacemaker contest saw an increase in entries from the previous year, suggesting continued acclaim for the contest. Four judges with extensive publication experience traveled to Minneapolis in late January to participate in the judging process.

Categories were arranged proportionately according to page number in order for books similar in page count to compete against each other. After an intensive initial cut lasting several hours, judges methodically narrowed down the entries.

Judges looked for a number of factors, including excellent photography, complete coverage, innovative design and exemplary copy. Out of the 54 total entries, 15 college yearbooks were chosen as Pacemaker finalists.

The Pacemaker winners will be announced at the Fall ACP/CMA National College Media Convention in Austin, Oct. 28-Nov. 1. Registration will be available on the ACP website.

Judges were asked to provide written comments about what they looked for, which are posted below.

I look for complete coverage, both in depth and breadth. There are some must-haves, like accurate scoreboards with scores, not just a list of wins and losses or an overall record, for all sports. Another must is a complete index where the reader can find not only names but also listings for specific sports, clubs, classes, events and advertisers.

Beyond the must-haves, I look for coverage that tells a complete story on more than one level. That includes storytelling and candid photos with complete captions. It means copy is filled with meaningful quotes that give the reader a sense of the event or the class or the season. It means there’s secondary coverage that provides additional layers to the coverage.

I also look for books that have experimented with different forms of coverage, whether it be through incorporating a variety of moods or through rethinking the presentation with topical or umbrella coverage.

The bottom line is that the staff captured the entire year in coverage that extends beyond the obvious and presented it in ways that appeal to readers.

I believe that a Pacemaker recognizes a publication that showcases strong student work in all areas of publishing — writing, design, photography and concept. The finalists took 2007-08 and created a unique publication that gave us, the judges, a sense of what the year was like for this specific group of students.

Staffs and advisers need to continue to educate themselves on the copyright laws and make sure that any work included in the yearbook follows the law in terms of appropriate permissions or fair use, and proper credit.

The best books showed the reader the story through interesting and multi-layered coverage, good photography, stunning copy, meticulous editing and creative design. In some instances, I had to force myself to stop looking and reading the book.

The multi-layered approach was a key element. Not only did the top publications have all the essentials (scoreboards, an index, identifications, etc.) they also had complete captions, infographics and well written copy.  Often, the best stories captured what it was like to be at the event covered. Attention to story telling details, such as editing and use of quality quotes, helped the story progress.

Publication staffs should recognize work in the publication through proper credits — all photos and writing should include credits.

It was fun to see how staffs chose to cover the presidential campaign. The best publications localized the coverage so that it spoke to the experiences of their student body.

Strong photography is essential to a Pacemaker publication (and all others as well). This means images that tell stories to the reader, that show action or reaction, that are technically competent (this means avoiding pixelation!), and that demonstrate good composition. The best publications showed us amazing photographs that we wanted to look at, not the same images we see every year.

I was most attracted to books with creative design. The books I loved had a unique theme or personality that was carried out visually in the design.

Books that had strong photography also caught my eye. So many of the books captured awesome action shots.

Basic design principals also rated high for me. Books that were well done had nice typography, great photography, clear concept and hierarchy of elements.

Overall, the best books were the ones that were beautiful to look at AND interesting to read. Many of them I didn’t want to put down!

I was most concerned about the lack of photo credits in some books. Some very nice books didn’t make the cut for me because of illegal use of copyright images. It’s just not acceptable to download images from the Web without permission for publication.

In general, I was very impressed at the quality of the top books.

Scroll down on the ACP home page to see the ACP View gallery, or visit the ACP flickr.com gallery directly.

We recently gave our oldest daughter a cell phone. Our calling plan includes a fixed number of “talk minutes” so we established strict rules about how much she could use it. Turns out, that was unnecessary. She rarely uses her telephone for talking; she — and her ring of friends — text. She calls me or speaks to her grandparents and others of the pre-text generation, but otherwise her thumbs do nearly all of her talking.

Texting, instant-messaging, Twittering, blogging, social networking, e-mailing and the like are the primary means of communication for today’s young people. It’s not surprising, then, that these practices have followed young journalists into the newsroom. At the SPLC, our mostly college-aged news interns – who sit within eight feet of one another – will more often send an instant message to each other than turn around and ask their question aloud.

Despite its growing popularity, some veteran journalists scoff at interviews and research conducted entirely by “e-reporting,” arguing — I think somewhat persuasively — that email and other forms of written, electronic communication miss the nuances, depth and spontaneity of an in-person interview. Even telephone interviews allow a reporter to hear changes in the speaker’s tone or voice inflection that e-mail and its close cousins don’t pick up very well. A written, “Of course he did it” is much different from the same statement when said sarcastically or with a chuckle.

As a source frequently on the receiving end, I find that e-mail interviews have their ups and downs. On the up side, they do allow for greater flexibility, allowing a source to respond to a reporter’s query at his or her convenience. They also allow time to reflect on one’s answer and provide a concise, often more thoughtful response. On the other hand, providing written responses to a dozen broadly worded questions can take much more time, doesn’t allow for ready follow-up or clarification questions by reporter or source and does seem to have a bit of an antiseptic feel as the words are so carefully honed — both in the question and the response — that the interview loses a bit of the human touch.

Whatever your thoughts on the matter, however, e-reporting is here to stay, at least until replaced by the next leap in communications technology. Given that, it makes sense to learn to use these new reporting tools carefully and avoid some of the more common legal pitfalls.

While most of the legal issues presented by e-reporting are similar to those that arise in more traditional print and broadcast reporting, there are some important differences. Here, briefly, are a few to watch for.

Confirming source’s identity
Unlike a face-to-face interview, and to a lesser degree a telephone interview, conducting an interview entirely by e-mail or instant messages is accomplished without ever seeing or hearing the source, which can — and has — left reporters and editors vulnerable to pranks and more nefarious acts.

As Mike Foley, a former editor of the St. Petersburg Times who now teaches at the University of Florida’s College of Journalism and Mass Communications said for a story in American Journalism Review, “[With e-mail] you don’t know who you’re talking to. It could be the CEO, the public relations VP, the secretary, a clerk — it could be the janitor who just happened to be in there cleaning up.”

Many news media organizations have adopted a policy that requires an editor to call or talk with the author of a letter to the editor to confirm that the person named did, in fact, submit it. It makes sense to adopt a similar policy before concluding that an e-mail or text message is legitimate.

Invasion of privacy
Privacy in cyberspace can be a tricky thing. If you sneak into a locker room and start taking photos of half-clothed athletes without permission, you’ve likely opened yourself up to an invasion of privacy claim. But what if a classmate on Facebook has posted similar photos to his “friends”-only page? Are they fair game to republish in the yearbook? Unfortunately, a hard “yes” or “no” answer can be elusive. For one thing, of course, it will depend on the specific nature of the photo. A highly revealing photo taken behind closed doors is more likely to cause trouble than one taken at a “private” party attended by several hundred people. The answer also likely depends on just how “private” or “public” the Facebook page itself is. If the classmate has only “friended” two or three of his closest pals and you’re not one of them but have somehow gained access to his site, he likely has a greater claim to privacy than if he has 300 friends that can freely view the photos, one of which is you. The key thing to remember: Just because something is in electronic form or online does not automatically make it “public.”

Another potential concern — both for legal and ethical reasons — is the ease with which electronic communication can be shared. While the Supreme Court has indicated that you don’t break any laws in publishing newsworthy, unsolicited information sent to you by others, it’s not always clear whether a particular photo or piece of information is, in fact, newsworthy. Finally, exercise caution and good judgment before forwarding sensitive documents or photos to others. (Remember, they have a “forward” key as well.)

Copyright issues
It surprises many to find out that email, text messages and even those tiny Twitter updates are, in most cases, protected by copyright. Once one’s original, minimally creative words are put into a fixed form — even if they are just a bunch of electrons on a screen — the author owns them. And unless you obtain his permission to use them — or unless you can make a legitimate “fair use” claim to use a portion of his work — you don’t have a legal right to republish them. (Unfortunately, a full discussion of the Fair Use exception is beyond the scope of this article. Still, if you don’t know what Fair Use is, as a journalist you must find out. Check out the SPLC’s Student Media Guide to Copyright Law for more information.)

Avoiding confusion about reporting status
The relaxed attitude of some e-reporting can be problematic.

“People sometimes don’t realize they’re on the record,” veteran reporter Paul Conley told American Journalism Review. “I have to remind people that I’m a reporter in order to get a usable quote, to overcome the bad spelling and the willful ignorance of grammar.”

For both legal and ethical reasons it is essential that a source know before he hits “Send” that his text message or email response is being sent to a reporter for possible use in a published story. A prominent disclaimer to that effect on every e-mail message could be helpful, but is probably not an all-purpose shield. Somehow, you must convey — and it must be clear to you that they understand — your reporter’s status before any substantive, on-the-record conversation takes place. (Ideally, you’d retain the written communication as record of their assent, though it’s not required.)

Confidentiality issues
If you have promised a source that you will not reveal his or her identity, you had better not be communicating with them through their personal computer, cell phone or any other form of electronic communication linked to them. E-reporting leaves a clear, physical trail that can pretty easily be traced. In most cases, both you and your secret source will be much better served by an old-fashioned face-to-face interview.

Libel
At its core, libel is about publishing information that’s untrue. While e-reporting can be efficient for obtaining quick, concise statements or bits of information from a source, such “efficiency” is no excuse for getting the story wrong. The days of carefully crafted correspondence in beautiful longhand are over. Instead, future historians, chronicling life at the turn of the 21st Century, can look forward to poring though files and files of messages dashed off in 20 seconds or less. (Imagine if tjeff@gmail.com had sent reporters an advance copy of his opening remarks: “We hld deez truths 2B self-evident, dat ll men r cr8d eql….” ) E-reporting should complement — not entirely replace — more traditional reporting. NetSpeak and 140 characters or less Twitter messages work for some things, but definitely not for others. A complex story requires complex, thorough reporting and a crystal clear understanding of exactly what is being said. The informal, hurried nature of some electronic communication makes that much more difficult, probably impossible. Your job is to find and report the truth. There are no shortcuts.

Finally, while it might not be helpful when trying to protect a confidential source’s identity, that e-mail trail or instant messaging transcript can make it easier to get a source’s quote or the information he provides exactly right. That same e-trail can also help you confirm the quote in case questions later arise about its accuracy. Of course, having such a fixed record can also work to one’s detriment if a reporter carelessly copies and pastes a source’s words or otherwise screws up. The source probably has the same email trail on his computer and can quickly call it up to prove a sloppy reporter’s mistakes.

Entries may include accounts of the lifestyles, challenges and potentials of the disadvantaged in the United States and around the world, including insights into the causes, conditions and remedies of their plight and critical analyses of public policies, programs, attitudes and private endeavors relevant to their lives.

Entries will be accepted in the categories of print and broadcast. First prize winners in each category will be flown to Washington, D.C. in the spring to attend an awards ceremony honoring student and professional work. Airfare and accommodations will be provided. A prize of $500 will be awarded to the winning student’s school to be used for student journalism programs.

The deadline to enter is Jan. 30, 2009. Download the entry form here.

Register by Jan. 30 (and keep your ACP membership current) to get reduced rates. Hotel rooms are just $115 per night for convention delegates at the Crowne Plaza Northstar in downtown Minneapolis.

Download the Best of the Midwest brochure in PDF format

Register online for Best of the Midwest

Learn about ACP’s other conventions, including the National College Journalism Convention Feb. 26-March 1, 2009 in San Diego.

For the Online Pacemaker, ACP has a Web form, with complete contest rules, that you can fill out in minutes and give your staff a chance to be recognized for your website. The contest is free to ACP member publications/media; the form will indicate your publication’s membership status as you fill it out. All we need is your URL by Feb. 17. Enter today!

ACP yearbook members and past contest entrants have been snail-mailed and e-mailed entry forms for the 2008 contest. If you need another copy, you can download the PDF here. Entry deadline for Yearbook Pacemaker is Jan. 15, 2009. As with the Online Pacemakers, a current membership in ACP is required to enter the contest.

The Pacemaker winners and finalists were recognized at the Associated Collegiate Press/College Media Advisers National College Media Convention in Kansas City on Nov. 1, 2008. Judges from the St. Petersburg Times selected the newspaper finalists, judges from The New York Times Magazine selected the feature magazine finalists and judges from The National Poetry Review selected the literary magazine finalists. The comments below reflect their enthusiasm and admiration for the winning entries. —Kathy Huting, ACP contests coordinator

2008 ACP ONLINE PACEMAKERS
View winners’ list and gallery
View March 2008 ACP press release with judges’ comments

2007 ACP YEARBOOK PACEMAKERS
View winners’ list and gallery
View February 2008 ACP/NSPA press release with judges’ comments

2008 ACP NEWSPAPER PACEMAKERS: JUDGES’ COMMENTS
View winners’ list and gallery

Four-year Daily newspapers

The Battalion, Texas A&M. Centerpiece feature on all fronts consistently worthy. Excellent writing in the piece about the coach who has been around 50 years. More consistently readable feature writing than most. Compelling feature story design.

Daily Iowan, University of Iowa. Consistently strong in writing, photography and design, this is a well-edited newspaper. Centerpieces are always well-executed and well-planned. Design is clean and inviting, not flashy. The paper shows tremendous range, from its quick and compete daily account of the deaths of a local family of six, to a nicely told profile of a 19-year-old with a stew of mysterious illnesses, to an enterprise piece on bars serving drunks. Nicely done from cover to cover.

Daily Northwestern, Northwestern University. Nice tabloid design. Edgy. Good mix of news/features. Nice feature about a professor’s experience in Teach America and how it shapes his teaching

Daily Tar Heel, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Strong paper all the way through, knows how to handle the obligatory news and how to take on a big story. We especially appreciated the presentation and care put into the coverage of a murdered student body president.

Harvard Crimson, Harvard University. It looks a bit old-fashioned, wide-webbed and with all cap headlines, but it did an especially impressive special tab section to mark the 5th year anniversary of the war with Iraq, collecting the stories and viewpoints of a wide variety of people with Harvard connections, most very well written. Reading the Crimson also gives one a definite sense of place.

Indiana Daily Student, Indiana University. An all-around solid newspaper with meaty daily coverage of a wide variety of news, including the basketball coach’s NCAA sanctions and the school’s decision to oust him. Shows editorial courage and leadership in the refusal to agree to keep an open speech off-the-record. Consistently solid  writing, Great graphics and design. Creative: In an op-ed piece, four columnists make the case for why they should be president of the USA; readers vote online. Provides a definite sense of place. A paper that does this much so well might want to take on more large-scale enterprise.

Kentucky Kernel, University of Kentucky. A solid paper throughout. The most impressive examples of narrative enterprise we saw, with sophisticated writing and strong documentary photography. This paper sent a writer and photographer to Vietnam for 16 days and produced a 6-page special section from the trip. This paper is doing distinctive storytelling at the heart of what matters to its campus community. Enterprise journalism like this is extremely rare at the college level, and the paper is to be commended not only for trying it, but for excelling at it.

Northern Star, Northern Illinois University. A small paper tackled one of the biggest news stories in the country when a gunman open fire on campus. This little paper responded admirably, dumping its ads and producing a stocked edition for the next day. College papers rarely get opportunities to respond to breaking news but this one handled itself professionally. Reading the coverage of both the breaking story and the aftermath, you get a sense of just how much a newspaper like this comes to mean to a strained community. This paper became both a reflection of the chaos and grief and a voice of comfort and leadership.

The State News, Michigan State University. Very clean, well organized and inviting design. This paper excels at routine coverage and brings a flair to special reports. We liked the thought and presentation put into the story about Mugabe’s honorary degree. Graphics are well-done and used liberally without becoming busy (as in the lifestyle travel front and the housing guide.) This paper knows its audience and shows strong news judgment appropriate to the campus community.

Four-Year Non-daily newspapers

District, Savannah College of Art and Design. Clean and well organized. We love the artist profiles, which give a real sense of the campus and community. We also enjoyed the little surprises, like the comixextraviganza.

F Newsmagazine, Art Institute of Chicago. Elegant, sophisticated design. Writing goes beyond reacitve news reports and predictable editorials, incorporating voice and perspective throughout the paper. A professional publication with personality.

GW Hatchet, George Washington University. Newsy, thorough campus coverage, nice use of photos, gives a good sense of place. Editorials are focused, relevant, to the point. Strong sports coverage.

The Hoya, Georgetown University. Traditional, professional design with a nice balance of stories and a fun weekly magazine. (The writing overall needs some work). The paper reflects the diversity of the community.

The Ithacan, Ithaca College. Thorough campus coverage, good use of graphics, strong sports preview section. Clean, well organized design.

Mars Hill, Trinity Western University. Artistic, eye-popping design. Combines thoughtful enterprise and solid news coverage. Has a voice but pushes no agenda. Beautiful covers and center spreads. Has a refreshing capacity for surprise.

Nevada Sagebrush, University of Nevada at Reno. This paper shows strong news judgment and is not afraid to take risks. Its clever feature on sperm and egg donation merged nice graphics and strong writing (but would have been stronger with full names.)

News-Letter, Johns Hopkins University. Meaty and ambitious, with strong writing througout. Design is a bit old fashioned. We appreciated the series on development in the campus neighborhoods.

NW Missourian, Northwest Missouri State University. Meaty, newsy paper with nice photo play. News judgment is relevant and balanced.

The Volante, University of South Dakota. Eye-catching, clean design. Nice use of graphics, photos and maps. Well-written overall, with fun regular features throughout and a lively feature section. We liked seeing snowboarding on the sports page.

Two-Year college newspapers

The Advocate, Contra Costa College. Digs into community violence with multiple story approaches, from graphic treatment to breaking news photography. Paper shows ambition, enterprise and leadership.

The Campus Ledger, Johnson County Community College. Makes the most of its photography, even in less than ideal situations. Takes advantage of the tabloid format with lots of center spreads. Writing and design are clean and clear.

News-Register, North Lake College. Newsy paper thoroughly reflects campus concerns, both at the very local level and through appropriate coverage of state and national issues.

The Sun, Southwestern College. Sophisticated design, well-packaged elements make the paper easy to navigate. Shows enterprise and provides a clear sense of place and community.

The Sentinel, North Idaho College. Compelling stories, clean design, nice use of graphics. Lively and well-designed Extra section.

2008 ACP FEATURE MAGAZINE PACEMAKERS: JUDGES’ COMMENTS
View winners’ list and gallery

Buzz, University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. A weekly arts magazine, with this issue the annual roundup called the Best of C.U. Newspaper tabloid style on newsprint, so not as visually impressive as some of the others, but I found it a fun and useful guide, and a good read. Based on a reader survey (carried out by the magazine, presumably) the winners were then written up in a snappy and sometimes cheeky fashion, giving the survey the stamp of the editorial staff. Nicely organized, nice table of contents, admirable corrections column. Very impressive that this is a weekly publication.

CURJ (Caltech Undergraduate Research Journal). This is out and out a science magazine, publishing student research papers which for the most part will be incomprehensible to the lay reader. The subject areas include atmospheric science, combinatronics and applied physics. But the design of this magazine is classy and elegant, really downright beautiful. The headlines and first paragraphs are fun and inviting, and layouts, graphics and illustrations are inventive and in some cases very complicated. Some of the professional science journals, with their gray layouts and technical headlines, might take a lesson from CURJ.

Detours, Truman State University. A travel magazine to the Midwest. True to theme throughout, nice photos, varied ideas about things to do in the Midwest. I couldn’t tell if it was a regular magazine or if this was a one-shot. But it’s nicely done.

Drake Magazine, Drake University School of Journalism. This one had a sophistication and comprehension of magazine structure and design that were not equaled elsewhere. The cover, a simple but elegant graphic based on words and a geometric background, was inviting and clear. The index, on a two page spread, echoed the cover graphic, and elegantly presented the total contents — front of the book, well, and back of the book — in clear and size-appropriate order, with the four well stories visually predominant but the other elements quickly grasped, and easily found in the magazine itself. At least one of the well stories was a new and surprising subject to me: diabulemia, in which diabetics forgo insulin injections in order to lose weight. A fashion/cultural comment feature called Girls Gone Mild (a bit of a cliché in a headline these days) was fun and interesting. A piece on on-line universities was informative. And the fourth well piece, on video games, took a sharp look at their impact on study habits. I was especially impressed by the attention given to the front and back of the book sections, and by the elegant transitions between these sections. Bits & Pieces offered cultural observations, a brief book review, news snippets (a story about how hedgehog safety resulted in a safer McFlurry container) and other short items. The back of the book, like the front, featured a number of clever short items under catchy rubrics: Spare Change (stories about personal finance), Folks, Say What (an article about students experimenting with a robot baby, as a family planning exercise). Photographs throughout were fine, though this was not the magazine’s strongest element. But altogether a really impressive effort, beautifully designed, with a coherent clear editorial mission.

The Epoch, St. John’s College. This is a serious issue oriented publication that examines in every article the methodology undertaken in order to get an “unbiased” report. This is an interesting journalistic exercise, though it does get in the way of the reading experience, giving each piece a kind of academic plodding feel, with a few too many references to the writer and his efforts. But the stories are quite interesting, notably the ambitious cover story on the Earth Liberation Front. Nice photos and design.

Legacy, Louisiana State University. I found this magazine varied, energetic and responsible. I liked the design, especially a very nice Table of Contents page with a vertical design. Good use of black and white photography, good articles about LSU matters, including a profile of photographer Thomas Neff, illustrated with his own photos of Katrina. The whole magazine has an impressively coherent voice.

The Point, Biola University. Contents for the most part reflect the religious orientation of the school (an article on a social group that is also a ministry, on depression (with a large-type reference to “our own sinful tendencies” as one of the causes of depression), the intersection of faith and art — but also on dorm room culture, the deaf community at Biola, and national politics. Design is adequate, as are the photos. But the issues addressed are substantive, and the neat, tidy and somewhat modest images feel in keeping with the subject matter.

Scholastic, University of Notre Dame. As a student run bi-weekly, Scholastic is quite an achievement. This issue, dated 27 September 2007, featured a serious cover story on the deteriorating music facilities at Notre Dame, illustrated on the cover with a lovely photo of a violin student, and inside with interesting photo illustrations and a photo graphic. The index is straightforward and informative, with an interesting mix of stories. An editorial on Notre Dame football and its poor season start ended up by acknowledging that although N.D. football is a dynasty, “it’s just a game.” Good, varied and readable, and especially impressive for its frequency.

Think. Drake University. There were three good entries from Drake, but I was impressed by the unabashed advocacy in this one. The issue includes a surprisingly opinionated editorial letter on the need for America to get back in touch with the world. This viewpoint is carried out in the articles, book reviews, short takes on consumer buying and global responsibility. It’s not to everyone’s political taste, but I admired the forthrightness of it.

Tuesday Magazine, Harvard College. I ranked this as low as #7 because it’s a literary magazine and thus didn’t seem quite right in a college journalism contest. But it’s a very classy publication, beautifully produced. The digital photo on the cover (repeated inside) is striking, and there are many impressive essays, short stories, collages, poetry and photographs throughout.

2008 ACP LITERARY MAGAZINE PACEMAKERS: JUDGES’ COMMENTS
View winners’ list and gallery

In The Bridge, Despina Cunningham, Derrick J Zellmon, Davide George Jr., Adrienne Berklend and Nicole Fontenaulf brought it home visually, aided by David Bevens Jr.s’ Linda Brewer “20/20″ stylized “scarred” (nonfiction) and Leah VanVaerenewyck’s imagistic beginning to “Sense” (nonfiction).

In Catch, visual artists Angelo Kozonis and Katie Bell are assisted by writers who show future potential (e.g. Olivia Engel, Mark Imielski, Hillary Grimes, Lucas Street, Stefen Showers, Adam Soto and Laura Miller).

I especially admired Todd Cook’s “Possum” (Revel), Suzanne Devan’s “Swin Cap” (Phoenix), Rob Byrd’s ?”The Vagrant” (Archarios) and Anne Torlekson’s stunning sculpture “Fragile” (Kiosk). There were some written moments, especially in Kiosk, but again, I would encourage more rigor there. Poetry, like literature in general after all, is an art form first! Thank you to the visual artists, especially for making tangible poetry.

In Owen Wister Review, Hillary Haulik, Clay DeVilbiss, Jeff Hubbell, Mary Williams, etc. (visual artists) get their best support from Jones Doyle and T.C. Rothson (poetry, fiction).

There were nice written moments in these magazines, but I longed for more strength in the poetry sections. Why not follow the same rigors in teaching writing that we do in other arts?

Other sources of front pages and Web screenshots:

Newseum: Today’s Front Pages Archive: Nov. 5, 2008

NewsDesigner.com front page collection

Election night homepages by Jim Ray on flickr.com

Contact: Logan Aimone, executive director, (612) 625-7359

National Scholastic Press Association appoints members to Board of Directors, Finance Committee

MINNEAPOLIS (October 1, 2008) — The Board of Directors of the National Scholastic Press Association (NSPA) has appointed two new members to its Board of Directors and an outside adviser to its finance/investment committee. The two new directors will join seven directors. All new members have two-year terms.

Tim Dorway has been principal of Mayo High School in Rochester, Minn., since 2006. He is a former journalism educator, advising the newspaper and yearbook staffs at Park High School in Cottage Grove, Minn., from 1996-2002. He was an assistant principal at Owatonna (Minn.) High School for four years. He earned a B.S. in English language arts from Winona State University and a M.A. and administrative credential from St. Mary’s University. While Dorway was publications adviser, Park High School was nationally recognized twice for its support of the First Amendment. Dorway will serve NSPA’s board in the role of treasurer.

Monica Hill is the director of the North Carolina Scholastic Media Association, based at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is also working to establish the North Carolina College Media Association. She previously directed the Alabama Scholastic Press Association. She earned a B.A. in journalism from Auburn University, a M.A. in journalism from the University of Alabama and a M.Ed. from the University of Montevallo. Hill served as vice head and head of the Scholastic Journalism Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.

David Therkelsen is currently the executive director of Crisis Connection. From 1978-2006, he served in a variety of senior management roles with the American Red Cross, including CEO of the St. Paul Area chapter. He holds a B.A. in journalism and political science form Metropolitan State University and the University of Minnesota and a M.B.A. from the University of St. Thomas. He also writes, teaches and lectures in journalism and public relations. Therkelsen will participate on NSPA’s Finance and Investment Committee with three members of the Board of Directors.

About NSPA
NSPA is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit membership organization headquartered and incorporated in Minnesota. Memberships for middle school, junior high school and high school student media are organized under the Minnesota High School Press Association division of NSPA. Memberships for college, university and professional and technical school student media are organized under the Associated Collegiate Press division of NSPA. Memberships are open to all student media at public and private schools at an annual membership fee.
Each division of NSPA provides journalism education training programs, publishes journalism education materials, provides media critique and recognition programs for members, provides information on developments in journalism and student media and provides a forum for members to communicate with others and share their work. NSPA and its divisions cooperate with other student media associations and other non-student groups and businesses that share its mission to educate and recognize the work of student journalists, to improve the quality of student media and to foster careers in media.

# # #

Later in the fall, at the above pages, there will be links to images of the winning entries and comments from the judges. Winners of all of these contests will be announced at the ACP/CMA convention in Kansas City.

Here is a press release for the individual awards finalists:

The Associated Collegiate Press is pleased to announce the 2008 Individual Awards finalists in the Story of the Year, Photo Excellence, Reporter of the Year, Design of the Year, Cartooning and Advertising contests.

The Story of the Year contest recognizes initiative and original reporting of a situation, problem or issue affecting students. Students entered stories in the categories of news, feature, sports, editorial, diversity and online package. Judges selected finalists based on the following criteria: Impact of story on the audience, quality of reporting and quotes, writing and editing, credibility and sensitivity. Out of the 715 total entries, judges from the Minnesota News Council chose 28 finalists.

The Photo Excellence contest honors student photographers in the categories of general news, spot news, feature, sports, environmental portrait and picture story. Judges selected finalists based on technical quality, artistic value and journalistic content. Out of the 774 entries, judges from the National Press Photographers Association and the Evansville Courier & Press selected 29 finalists.

The Reporter of the Year contest recognizes individual achievement in student journalism. Entries consist of a reporter’s three best single news or feature stories published in a college newspaper during the competition year. The four-year college entries were judged by MCT campus and the two-year college entries were judged by Herald & Review. Out of the 122 entries, the judges chose seven finalists.

The Design of the Year contest honors visual excellence in the college press and is co-sponsored by Adobe Systems. Judges from Adobe selected the finalists based on the following criteria: Contemporary appeal, trends, effective use of photos, color, art, graphics, typography and suitability for the respective audiences. Out of the 494 entries, 29 finalists were selected.

The Cartooning awards are co-sponsored by Universal Press Syndicate and the contest is divided in the categories of editorial cartoon and comic strip or panel. Entries were judged based on reader impact, community importance, artistic quality, originality and clarity of message. Out of the 196 entries, judges from Universal Press Syndicate chose eight finalists.

The Advertising awards honor excellence in the categories of display ad, in-house promotional ad, ad campaign, ad or editorial supplement and brochure or rate card. Judges from Swift Communications selected finalists based on contemporary appeal, trends, effective use of photos, color, art, graphics, typography and suitability for the respective audiences. Out of the 277 entries, judges selected 21 finalists.

The winners will be honored at the ACP/CMA National College Media Convention awards ceremony in Kansas City on Nov. 1. Registration for the convention is now available online at www.studentpress.org/acp.

ACP encourages properly cited use of this information for individual press releases. Please contact Kathy Huting, contest and critique coordinator, for further information.

ACP is a division of the National Scholastic Press Association, a non-profit education organization which strives to educate and recognize the work of student journalists, to improve the quality of student media and to foster careers in media.

# # #

2008 ACP Newspaper Pacemaker Finalists

2008 ACP Magazine Pacemaker Finalists

Announced in the spring:

2008 ACP Online Pacemaker Finalists

2007 ACP Yearbook Pacemaker Finalists

Later in the fall, at the above pages, there will be links to publication images and comments from the judges. Winners of all of these contests will be announced at the ACP/CMA convention in Kansas City.

Here is a press release for the newly announced Newspaper and Magazine Pacemakers:

The Associated Collegiate Press is pleased to announce the 2008 Newspaper and Magazine Pacemaker finalists. Out of 241 newspaper entries in three categories, judges from The St. Petersburg Times selected 48 entries for recognition. The list of finalists is available at: http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/npm08.html

Out of 78 magazine entries, judges from The New York Times Magazine selected 10 finalists for the feature magazine category, and judges from The National Poetry Review selected eight finalists for the literary magazine category. The list of finalists is available at: http://acp.studentpress.org/winners/mpm08.html

Newspaper finalists were chosen based on excellence in the following areas: Coverage and content, quality of writing and editing, leadership on the opinion page, evidence of in-depth reporting, layout and design, and photography, art and graphics.

Magazine finalists were chosen based on excellence in the following areas: Content, quality of writing and editing, photography, art and graphics, layout and design and overall concept.

The winners will be honored at the ACP/CMA National College Media Convention awards ceremony in Kansas City on Nov. 1. Information about the convention is available online at acp.studentpress.org.

Since 1927, the Pacemaker has been the highest honor available to ACP members and today is considered one of the most prestigious awards in collegiate journalism.

ACP encourages properly cited use of this information for individual press releases. Please contact Kathy Huting, contest and critique coordinator, for further information.

ACP is a division of the National Scholastic Press Association, a non-profit education organization which strives to educate and recognize the work of student journalists, to improve the quality of student media and to foster careers in media.

# # #

The past several years have seen the emergence of several student-written sex columns in college student newspapers and sex-themed advice shows on student radio or TV. From The Cornell Daily Sun’s now lapsed (but I couldn’t resist the name) “Cornellingus” to the Daily Illini’s “Sex Column Answer Man” at the University of Illinois to the “Wednesday Hump” column in the Daily Nexus at University of California/Santa Barbara, sex — or at least talking about it — is “in” on America’s college and university campuses (not that it was ever out, of course).

As such columns began making their way across the country — angering/shocking more than a few folks along the way — the Student Press Law Center started receiving calls from anxious editors wondering if they’d crossed any legal boundaries by allowing their columnists to bare all with their no-holds-barred discussion of topics previously reserved for the pages of men’s’ magazines. As the years have passed, the pace of the questions has slowed, but they continue. Of course, the editorial decision to publish a column that may upset many of your readers (while entertaining/enlightening many others) will remain a tough one for some. But hopefully, this will help put most minds at ease with respect to the law.

Let’s start with an easy one: Student sex columns or advice shows are not obscene. Some readers find them vulgar or crude or offensive — pick your own adjective — but that is not the same as “obscene.” Obscenity is a legal term for expression that is not protected by the First Amendment and that can subject the publisher, and in some cases, the distributor of such material to criminal prosecution. The bar for obscenity is high and student sex columns — at least all the ones that I’ve seen to date — don’t even come close. Obscenity is, very simply stated, exceptionally “hard core” sexual speech (almost always pictorial) that has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. Student sex columns that provide frank — sometimes graphic, sometimes informative, sometimes funny — discussion of sexual issues, often in response to reader questions, simply don’t qualify as obscene, as the law currently defines the term.

Where student sex columns are not obscene or otherwise unlawful, public college officials are required to keep their hands off. They can denounce the columns. They can send out a press release to local media or letters to unhappy donors or alumni that make clear the columns do not reflect official university policy. They can submit a letter to the editor asking that the paper reconsider its decision to publish the columns. But they cannot censor the columns, punish the editors or writers or take any action that in any way penalizes student media for publishing the material. The columns are constitutionally protected at a public college or university and school administrators — government officials — are prohibited from interfering with the students’ speech simply because they find it offensive, embarrassing or an obstacle to fundraising. That is, after all, why the First Amendment exists: we don’t want government officials dictating what citizens talk about.

Administrators at a private college — where the First Amendment is not a limiting factor — probably have more leeway to restrict what is published in school-sponsored student media, though even there the authority to censor may not be unlimited. A number of private schools, for example, have enacted a student media policy or a student bill of rights protecting student speech that they may be contractually bound to honor. In other cases, a state constitution or state law may provide legal protection against censorship. Such protections will vary by school.

Just because student sex columns are not legally obscene and (at least at public colleges) are generally censor-proof does not mean that the sex columnist and editors or producers are in the clear. Columns that address the generally private, highly intimate, often sensitive topic of sex are ripe with legal danger if not handled carefully. Writing in a column, for example, that Jane (or John) Smith enjoys an unconventional sex life, suggesting that an individual has had multiple partners or even, if unmarried, that they have had sex at all can seriously harm a person’s reputation among at least some substantial segment of society. And if it turns out the charges are not true, you have probably libeled them.

Even if it turns out that the claims are true, in disclosing details about their sex lives — details that they’ve not generally shared with others and without their consent — you have likely invaded their legal right to privacy. Everyone has a legal right to a reasonable zone of privacy in his or her personal life. There are places and topics that, absent an invitation from the subject or a bona fide news interest, are simply off-limits to others, including the press. An otherwise private person’s behind-closed-doors sex life is at or near the top of that list.

Fortunately, there are two reasonably simple ways to avoid such problems.

First, as suggested above, you can obtain the subject’s consent. If you make clear to the subject who you are (a reporter/columnist) and what you are doing (gathering information for publication in a print and/or online student newspaper or broadcast on student TV or radio), college students can consent to have their otherwise private stories told. Consent is an absolute defense to both an invasion of privacy claim and — if they’ve also okayed the facts you report — a libel claim. Because stories can change and memories fade, it is safest to get the consent in writing.

Alternatively, don’t publish the subject’s name or any other information that might allow others to identify them. A person cannot successfully sue for libel or invasion of privacy unless they have been identified. While you may know you’re talking about them and they may know you’re talking about them, unless a significant number of others can also reasonably identify them, you’re safe.

Of course, if hiding or disguising a person’s identity is your plan for avoiding liability, you need to do a good job of it. In one case, for example, a student author of a sex column called us for help after she’d been threatened with a lawsuit for writing about the sexual exploits of a former boyfriend. She hadn’t used names, but she had identified him in her bylined column as “my former boyfriend” so it wasn’t too hard for many campus readers, who had known the couple when they were together, to put the pieces together about whom she was writing. Avoid names, of course, but also be mindful of using addresses, physical descriptions, relationships, job titles, activities or any other unique descriptions that would allow others to narrow down the list of possible subjects.

Finally, most student author’s of sex columns or hosts of sex advice shows have no particular medical, psychological or other expertise on the topic (other than they might fancy themselves good at it). They are simply students with a keyboard or microphone. It makes sense, then, to include a prominent disclaimer that points out to one’s audience that they are simply getting advice from another student. If they have medical or other problems that require expertise, urge them to seek out an actual expert.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the “Lower 48,” and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.

In its research, NLGJA reached out to small liberal arts colleges, sprawling state schools, private institutions, two-year programs, universities with religious affiliations and all-girls schools. The result is a bank of columns detailing personal stories and teaching methods from students and educators hailing from over 20 states and representing nearly 30 colleges and universities.

Link to obituary in Harrisonburg Daily News Review

Tribute to Flip by Brad Jenkins, general manager of the Breeze at James Madison University

Link to Facebook group: In Memory of Albert “Flip” DeLuca

For NSPA and ACP, she will oversee all contests, including Best of Show and Pacemakers, and will coordinate the evaluation service. She will also have a large role to play in coordinating events and programs for the Minnesota High School Press Association.

Huting will begin training in NSPA’s Minneapolis office immediately. She is a 2008 graduate of Iowa State University with a double major in journalism and mass communications. She worked for two years on the Iowa State Daily newspaper, where she was the public relations manager as well as worked on special sections and the editorial board.

For NSPA and ACP, Griesser will coordinate convention trade shows and hotel logistics as well as implement a plan to recruit and retain members for the organization.

Griesser will begin work in our Minneapolis office June 9. She is currently working at the Betty Brinn Children’s Museum in Milwaukee, Wis., and holds a B.S. in communications studies from the University of Wisconsin – La Crosse.

• Newspaper Pacemaker Entry Form
• Magazine Pacemaker Entry Form
• Individual Awards Entry Form

There have been several changes to the contests this year, which are detailed below as well as on the entry forms:

• Newspaper Pacemaker: The number of issues of your paper to submit for the contest has increased to five from four, and two of them are issues of your choice, up from one last year (other papers submitted must be published within a specific timeframe; see entry form for details). This should help papers be able to submit their strongest work while still demonstrating consistent quality throughout the year.
• Magazine Pacemaker: Continuing the change made last year, we are taking entries in the spring for this award, for magazines published during the 2007-2008 school year. In previous years the entries were solicited in winter for the previous school year. We have also added two-year and four-year college categories to this year’s awards, to give magazines from smaller schools the opportunity to compete against their peers.
• Individual Awards (Story / Photo / Design / Reporter of the Year / Cartooning / Advertising): First of all, these contests now share a single entry form, with the form on the front and contest rules on the back (page 2 of the PDF), rather than six separate forms. Not only does this save paper, it will also make for fewer forms for contest entrants to keep straight. Remember to submit a separate form for each entry, and send all the entries together in one envelope if possible.

  Secondly, for the Photo Excellence contest, we are accepting only digital images, submitted online using this form. With digital photography in widespread use and most other photography contests moving to all-digital as well, we hope everyone will find this process more efficient than making prints and mailing them. Click the link above for further details.

  We have also added two new categories to the Photo Excellence contest: Photos taken on the scene of an unplanned, breaking news event may be entered in the new Spot News category. (All other types of news photos should be entered in the General News category.) There is also an Environmental Portrait category, which is for posed images of one or more individuals, taken in their natural surroundings to provide insight into their work, interests or personality. Finally, in a reversal of previous years’ rules, individual images in a picture story may also be entered separately in other categories.

The deadline to enter all of the contests is June 9 (entries must be recieved by that date). There is no entry fee for any of the contests, but publications must have a current ACP membership to enter. Enter soon!

In our lawsuit-happy world, you’d probably be hard-pressed to find many editors or news directors whose office telephone doesn’t include the news organization’s lawyer among their speed dial directory’s top ten.

Some of the bigger news media organizations routinely send nearly all of their content through legal counsel before going to press or air. Others, who don’t have in-house lawyers (or the free help of the Student Press Law Center) and can’t afford the $250/hour-plus cost of outside counsel to look at everything, still “lawyer-up” on a regular basis to assist with particularly sensitive or complex stories.

And while media law attorneys perform a valuable, and unfortunately, all-too-necessary, function, there is a right way and wrong way to use them.

Lyle Denniston, a veteran Supreme Court reporter who currently writes for Scotusblog, an online news site, once told a group I was part of that he believed one of the most dangerous threats to press freedom was a lawyer in the newsroom. His point wasn’t that media lawyers were bad or unnecessary (although he certainly wished, as do I, that they were a lot less necessary), but that their role should be limited. Journalists, he felt, too often used lawyers in a way that bypassed their making their own important, if difficult, ethical and editorial calls.

Most editors aren’t lawyers. But neither are most lawyers editors.

Getting information and advice from a lawyer should, reasonably, inform an editor’s decision to publish or not publish, but it should rarely, if ever, be the final word.

As a media lawyer who has counseled some 14,000 journalists and journalism educators over the course of nearly two decades now, here are a few thoughts from this side of the telephone (or e-mail).

1. Don’t ask, “Should I publish this?”
While one of the most frequent questions a media lawyer will get, it’s also the one a good media lawyer should refuse to answer. We can help you understand the law and the risks. We can also provide you with editorial options that might reduce your legal exposure. However, it is up to you, the editor (and perhaps the publisher), to decide whether the risks outweigh the benefits of publication.

2. Realize that the safest answer for a lawyer is often to discourage publication.
An editor and a lawyer have two different, and sometimes conflicting, goals. An editor’s job is to provide accurate, newsworthy information to his or her readers and audience. A lawyer’s goal is primarily to limit the news media organization’s liability. In most cases, if you don’t publish something, you’re not going to get sued for it, meaning the lawyer has done his or her job. Realize, however, that many important stories would never have been published if a lawyer alone – charged solely with keeping a newspaper or TV station out of court – had been allowed to make the final call. That doesn’t mean, of course, that you should simply ignore your lawyer’s advice since the flip side is that some costly media lawsuits could also probably have been avoided if the news organization had obtained or followed through on the suggestions of good legal counsel. As a journalist, however, you need to understand the built-in bias that can exist.

3. Not all lawyers are created equally.
That there are both competent and incompetent lawyers should come as no surprise. But there are many otherwise gifted lawyers who simply don’t have a clue about media law or an appreciation of the press’s role. The law, like medicine and just about everything else these days, is highly specialized. Your average family law attorney doesn’t know much, if anything, about the latest cases to interpret the publisher immunity provisions of the Communications Decency Act. (Just like most media lawyers are probably pretty useless in providing advice about the most recent developments regarding child custody). Of particular note, it has been my general experience that most school district or university attorneys – while good at helping their clients navigate personnel matters, negotiate contracts and avoid institutional liability – have little understanding of the press’s role and are not very useful (and often, are downright wrong) in helping student media navigate First Amendment and media law issues.

4. Become an informed consumer.
Just as it is important for you to know something about the various medicines before you automatically start popping those pills your doctor prescribed, it’s also important that you take the time to understand the fundamentals of media law and do your best to stay informed about important legal developments that might affect you. A good lawyer should probe enough to identify the key issues that might arise in a given situation and help provide the answers you need, but it is important that you know at least enough about the law to determine when you need to seek outside assistance (or when a second legal opinion might be warranted). Exercising a bit of legal self-awareness can go a long way; it is usually much easier to help you avoid legal trouble in the first place than to get you out of it.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the “Lower 48,” and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.

College newspapers everywhere are harnessing the power of the internet and new multimedia technologies to produce an eye-catching, accessible way to synthesize the news. ACP received 155 entries for the 2008 Online Pacemaker contest, ranging from Daily newspapers to Feature magazines. The 2008 Online Pacemaker judge was Will Sullivan, an award-winning Interactive Director of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. A graduate of Medill School of Journalism and the Poynter Institute, Will has worked with more than a dozen news organizations from Sydney, Australia to Toledo, Ohio in roles from photographer to Editor in Chief. His blog, Journerdism, is also a staple of the media blogging community. His complete comments on the finalists and winners are below. – Marisa Dobson

Wow.

Just wow.

I’m so encouraged to see all the excellent work being done at college papers across the country. I’m even more encouraged that it’s not just at the traditional ‘big name’ journalism schools.

Congratulations to all of the finalists and Pacemakers. This was probably the most difficult contest for me to judge in two years. The quality, design, depth, breadth and timeliness of content being produced at these college publications rivals and sometimes beats that of most ‘professional’ media outlets.

I was highly encouraged to see many papers producing podcasts, multimedia, blogs, forums and breaking news on their websites. Please continue this growth!

Along with that, I’d encourage exploring the following:

• Better blogging. Blogs are used at many outlets, but not to the level I would have expected, and many times not with a tone that embraces the opportunity blogs offer to present engaging personalities, discussion with the community and linking to other content. Inverted pyramid has no place in a blog. Blogs must be updated regularly.
• Social media is an undeniable strength in college media because you and your audience has all grown up with and use MySpace, Facebook, Digg, etc… Explore that in your media pursuits! Just like there was a recent rush for everyone to do video, I believe the next major ‘buzz’ job will be social media experts at news organizations and not enough college papers seem to be experimenting in this beyond offering the College Publisher template for social bookmarking articles.
• Data and mapping is another avenue I didn’t see explored nearly as much as it should be. Any journalist that specializes in this in college learns many valuable skills and if you do some awesome work, you’re guaranteeing yourself a job. I was encouraged to see some publications, such as the Collegiate Times at Virginia Tech and the California State University, Sacramento are on the bandwagon. Keep up the great work!
• Mobile tools seem to be very few and far between in college publications, and just like social media, this generation – your audience – lives through mobile content. Embrace and innovate!
• Convergence seems to be catching on. I was encouraged by several papers that are building and using convergence relationships with other student media outlets, such as the University of Illinois’ Daily Illini and George Mason’s Connect Mason. I highly, highly encourage this, if done right it’ll be mutually beneficial to all publications.
• Break more news online. Yes, it’s a different workflow, but mandatory in the new media age.
• Improve the web designs. College publisher is a cool, turn-key content management system, but don’t be afraid to try new things or modify their templates. There are hundreds of options out there and I would like to see more publications using more innovative CMS options or at least customizing the designs more so it feels less like a printed newspaper slapped on a screen. Among the Pacemaker finalists, San Francisco State’s Golden Gate [X]Press‘ design is a breath of fresh air and Ithaca College’s The Ithacan is simply gorgeous.

Again, these are just suggestions to keep the excellence flowing; the garden is never finished. Congratulations again to all the winners. I love that so many of these entries prove that circulation doesn’t matter — just as the Lawrence Journal World proves in the professional media — awesome web journalism can be done at any size publication. Daily, weekly or quarterly, whatever.

My final thought goes out to all the leaders and advisers of college publications, as well as the student members:

EXPERIMENT!

College is one of the few times in your career that you can try something totally wacky, fail and it won’t really set you back or ruin your career. Try alternative story forms. Learn new technologies. Break the mold of traditional journalism. Your generation and its ability to innovate will save the craft. I’m encouraged to see the progress you’ve made thus far and can’t wait to see what you do in the future.

Cheers,

Will Sullivan

The Northern Star staff put out an eight-page paper today (while being interviewed, no doubt, by scores of other media outlets throughout Thursday evening) and is hard at work keeping their Web site up to date as the story develops. Here is a link to their staff editorial about the shootings.

We’ve compiled a few front pages covering the event from today’s college newspapers in our ACP View gallery. If anyone else would like to include their coverage in the gallery, you can submit your PDFs here.

Go to the winners list

Read judging report with comments (includes NSPA high school yearbook judging)

It’s Feb. 15-17 at the Hilton in Minneapolis, and the program is shaping up to be spectacular. Come Friday afternoon for focused sessions on newspaper journalism followed by a keynote speech from two investigative reporters from the Star Tribune in Minneapolis who have been the watchdogs surrounding the collapse of the Interstate 35W bridge. Saturday’s keynote will be Joel Kramer, former publisher and editor of the Star Tribune, whose new venture, MinnPost.com, is a nonprofit online news site with an all-star lineup and an innovative mission. Sunday’s closing will be from Joel Schettler, a Minneapolis freelance writer and blogger about writing.

We’re also pleased to announce the return of individual “Best of the Midwest” contests. In addition to our usual Best of Show contest, students may also carry-in their published work to enter individual categories.

Register by Jan. 26 (and keep your ACP membership current) to get reduced rates. Hotel rooms are just $109 per night for convention delegates. Call the Hilton Minneapolis at 612-376-1000 or 800-933-5363 and mention the ACP Best of the Midwest Newspaper Convention to get the group rates.

Best of Show Winners
Newspaper Pacemaker Winners
Online Pacemaker Winners
Yearbook Pacemaker Winners
Magazine Pacemaker Winners (2007)
Magazine Pacemaker Winners (2006)
Story of the Year
Reporter of the Year
Photo Excellence Awards
Design of the Year
Cartooning Awards
Advertising Awards

There were nearly 250 entries in the Best of Show contest. The D.C. convention was attended by more than 2,500 students and advisers. Thanks to everyone for coming and making the convention a success. Next year’s fall convention is Oct. 29-Nov. 2, 2008 in Kansas City.

First they went after sex. Now it’s drugs. Student speech about Rock n’ Roll must understandably be quaking in its boots.

As you’ve no doubt heard by now – because who can possibly resist a headline that touts “Bong Hits,” “Jesus” and the “Supreme Court” in the same sentence? – in a 5-4 decision the Court ruled June 25 that Deborah Morse, principal at Juneau-Douglas High School in Juneau, Alaska, acted appropriately five years ago when, as the Olympic torch passed through town, she crossed the street in front of the school and ripped down the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” banner being held up on an off-campus, public sidewalk by then 18-year-old JDHS senior Joseph Frederick.

As it did in 1986 when it carved out a First Amendment exception for sexually “lewd and indecent” speech, the Court has now created another topic that’s off-limits to high school students: speech during a “school-sanctioned” and “school-supervised” event that is perceived as advocating illegal drug use.

The Court’s opinion raises a number of potentially troubling questions: First, what exactly is a “school-sanctioned” and “school-supervised” event? Can the school assume control over otherwise private student speech simply by determining – on its own – to “sanction” an event (even if that event didn’t ask to be “sanctioned” in the first place)? Second, how does one determine whether a message “advocates” illegal drug use? (I don’t know, but the message “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” has always struck me as just plain silly. Apparently, the bar for speech that “advocates” drug use is pretty low.) Finally, a (slim) majority of the Court has embraced the idea that carving out piecemeal, topic-based exceptions to what is protected student speech is okay, which, of course, begs the question “what topic is next?”

Such important questions aside, however, the ruling does include a tremendously important silver lining that, in the end, may be more helpful to students than the harm done by a hopefully narrow prohibition on speech that advocates illegal drug use. I predict one line, in particular, from Justice Alito’s pivotal concurring opinion will be cited by free speech proponents (and hopefully courts) in nearly every student speech case for decades to come:

“[This decision] provides no support for any restriction of speech that can plausibly be interpreted as commenting on any political or social issue.”

In other words, “school-sanctioned” and “school-supervised” student speech that includes a political or social component – speech that is at the core of what the First Amendment was meant to protect – cannot be censored by school officials absent some other legally justified reason (for example, the speech is libelous or obscene.) Indeed, had Frederick held up a banner (or presumably passed out flyers or an independent newspaper, created a private website or worn a T-shirt) that simply said “Legalize Marijuana” rather than the nonsensical gibberish he chose, the First Amendment would have protected it and, under this Court’s reasoning, he would have won his case.

Such a clear pronouncement from the United States Supreme Court recognizing the importance of protecting the right of students to freely discuss issues of political and/or social significance has been all too rare as of late and Justice Alito’s words appears to put student First Amendment rights on firmer footing than that provided by some recent lower court rulings. Of course, we’ll have to wait and see.

In the meantime, it is important that students who want to speak out on political or social issues do so in a thoughtful and direct manner. Don’t be cutesy. “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” -type banners may attract a lot of attention – but they also may leave the door open to administrative censorship.

If you want your voice to be heard (and legally protected) on a important issue of the day, just make sure you speak plainly – unless you want to talk about Rock ‘n Roll – then you should probably also speak quickly. The clock may be ticking on that one.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the “Lower 48,” and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.

Ever since the Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, which significantly increased administrative censorship authority over many student publications, public high school students have turned to state lawmakers for help in restoring some of the balance that had previously existed. After the federal Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s 2005 decision in Hosty v. Carter, which ruled that Hazelwood was the “starting point” for college press censorship cases in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin (the three states under its jurisdiction), college student media also began looking to their state lawmakers to ensure that Hazelwood’s reach didn’t cross their state’s border.

In January 2007, Washington became the first state to consider legislation that would provide such legal protection to both its college and high school student media. While the free press protections provided by the bill are consistent with those contained in other state laws – and recognized throughout the country for nearly 20 years prior to Hazelwood – HB 1307 would be the most comprehensive student free press law in the country and establish a good model for other states to work from.

The following questions and answers are adapted from oral and written testimony I provided to the Washington House Judiciary Committee on January 26, 2007, when it held hearings on HB 1307. Hopefully, they will help answer some of the more common questions and concerns raised by such legislation as it is considered in Washington and elsewhere.

Good morning. Thank you Madam Chair and members of the Committee. My name is Mike Hiestand. I am an attorney and for nearly 20 years now I have worked on legal issues affecting America’s student press. From 1991-2003, I was the staff attorney for the Student Press Law Center in Washington, DC. The SPLC is a nonprofit organization that, since 1974, has provided free legal assistance and information to America’s high school and college student media. Over my career, I have personally provided such help to over 14,000 student journalists and advisers. I am also the co-author of the Center’s book Law of the Student Press. While I continue to work closely with the SPLC, today I’m fortunate to be appearing in front of you simply as a fellow Washingtonian, living and working in the Bellingham area.

I appear before you this morning to offer my support for House Bill 1307. I can tell you that there is a vital need for this legislation in Washington and around the nation if we have any hope of teaching our young people the importance we place on press freedom and free expression in our country.

I provided some assistance in drafting the bill and I would be pleased to try and answer any questions you might have about this legislation.

But I’d also like to clear up some information I’ve heard today and read recently about what this bill will and won’t do.

Why are these laws needed?
In order to understand what is at stake you have to understand a little about the Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988), which changed the law for most high school-sponsored student media. And not just a little – but a lot. I know you’ve got quite a bit on your plate, but if you do nothing else, I urge you to at least take a look at what Hazelwood actually says. In my experience, most people are shocked when they hear just how much it altered the balance of administrative power. Under Hazelwood, school officials have the authority to censor many – though not all – high school student publications if they can show their actions are “reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical (educational) concerns.” While that sounds “reasonable” – and does not provide school officials with the unlimited license to censor many have claimed – the Court went on to give some examples – alarming in their vagueness and breadth – of what would meet that standard. Among other things, the Court said administrators could censor material they deemed “poorly written,” “biased,” “inappropriate” or “inconsistent with the shared values of a civilized social order.” Unfortunately, many school officials – like government officials historically – have taken full advantage of their censorship powers, with calls to the Student Press Law Center from student journalists seeking legal help rising five-fold from 1988 to the present. I don’t have to tell you that if all a principal or college president has to do to kill a story or editorial he or she doesn’t like is to label it “poorly written” or “inconsistent with the shared values of civilized social order,” students learn quickly that the lofty promises of the First Amendment can ring pretty hollow. And, unfortunately, as some of the studies regarding student attitudes about the First Amendment you have heard about this morning make clear, it’s a lesson that stays with them.

Does Hazelwood apply to public college student media in Washington?
No. At least not yet. Unfortunately, a 2005 federal court of appeals decision, Hosty v. Carter, 412 F.3d 731 (7th Cir. 2005), which ruled that Hazelwood could be applied to college student media in three Midwestern states, has led some college and university officials elsewhere – including here in Washington – to argue that they now have more control over college student media. The thought that free speech on an American college or university campus could be curtailed simply by an administrator declaring it “inconsistent with the shared values of a civilized social order” (however they might define that) is something that should give all of us great pause. HB 1307 would put an end to that threat.

Does this legislation give students the right to publish whatever they’d like?
No. This law includes some very clear restrictions. Students cannot publish unlawful speech. These are the same categories of speech that every journalist must avoid (libel, material that invades a person’s legal right to privacy, obscenity as to minors, etc.). The law also imposes an additional category of speech restriction specific to schools: high school students cannot publish speech that would significantly interfere with normal school activities. The standard adopted by HB 1307 comes directly from a Supreme Court standard (known as the Tinker standard) that was in place for student publications for nearly twenty years before the Supreme Court’s Hazelwood ruling. That standard created a meaningful balance between administrative authority to maintain a safe and effective learning environment and student free speech rights.

How many other states have enacted laws similar to HB 1307?
Six states – Arkansas, California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas and Massachusetts – have passed student free press legislation that defines the rights and responsibilities of high school journalists. (Pennsylvania has enacted state regulations that provide similar protection.) These laws have been on the books for over a decade and there has been no indication of any negative affect on schools in those states. In fact, if anything, high school journalism is better and more professional in those states because students understand that rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. In Fall 2006, in response to the Hosty decision, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law making California the first state in the country to pass similar free speech protection for college student media.

Wouldn’t this law conflict with the Supreme Court’s Hazelwood ruling?
No. Hazelwood is a First Amendment case. It does not require administrative censorship. Moreover, the First Amendment establishes a “floor” of legal protection. While states cannot pass a law that provides less protection than the First Amendment, the Court has made clear that states can always choose to provide more protection for their citizens. That is what HB 1307 does.

Would this law limit some of the censorship authority of public school administrators?
Yes. And I understand why some of them wouldn’t like that. I’m sure it is much easier for school officials to manage what, under current law, are often little more than public relations newsletters for the school. Allowing a genuine student newspaper that provides students a meaningful voice on issues that truly matter to them can be a threatening idea to those used to controlling the message. However, we have a First Amendment because, as a nation, we decided that a free and independent press plays a vital role in our democracy – even it it’s sometimes messier than a state-controlled press.

Fortunately, a number of administrators don’t look upon their student newspapers as an adversary or threat, but view an independent student press as an important school asset. They see the value in providing students with a forum to express their concerns and recognize the educational opportunities provided by a strong, well-supported student journalism program. (See, for example, the following articles from publications produced by the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the American Association of School Administrators for some administrators’ thoughts about the value of a healthy student press.)

What impact does this bill have on the authority of private school officials?
None. The law would only apply to public institutions.

What do teachers think of this legislation?
Every major journalism education group in the country – which represent the teachers in the classrooms and newsrooms who work directly with the students – has said that the type of legislation proposed in HB 1307 is the best and most effective way to teach journalism. If providing the “best education” for our students is the goal, certainly we must give great weight to those who actually do the educating. In Washington State, for example, both the Washington Education Association and the Washington Journalism Education Association have endorsed HB 1307.

Does this law allow for administrative prior review?
Nothing in the law prohibits high school administrators or an adviser from requiring their students to submit a copy of their publication to them for review prior to printing. However, while the law permits review (reading), it does limit the authority of school officials to actually alter or censor content unless they can show that it falls into one of the unprotected speech categories specified under this law. Nothing, of course, prevents school officials or advisers from raising their concerns with students about content. Mandatory administrative prior review of college student media is prohibited.

Isn’t the school the publisher?
The use of the word “publisher” in the context of student media is misleading and unhelpful. Like all publishers, schools may provide financial support (though not all do). But even so, a public school principal – unlike the private publisher of The Seattle Times – is a government official. The First Amendment specifically exists to limit the authority of government officials to control the speech of its citizens. Those limitations don’t exist for the owner of The Seattle Times. Moreover, unlike the owner of the Times, who actually does foot the newspaper’s bills and owns the presses, a public school principal no more owns a student newspaper than he or she owns the district’s school buses or the cafeteria. All taxpayers – which in Washington State’s sales tax-based revenue system, includes students – support student media at public schools. In fact, in some cases, student media receive no – or minimal – direct financial support from their school. In such cases, printer’s bills, computers, cameras and other supplies are provided by student-raised private advertising or student/parent fundraisers. Finally, it is also worth noting that under current law, unless schools pay their students as they would any other school employee or compensate them reasonably for their work pursuant to an independent contractor agreement, the student writers and photographers – not the school – own the intellectual property rights to the content they create, which is clearly different from commercial news organizations where private publishers do own all work created by their employees.

Does this bill make student more liable?
No. Student journalists have always been liable for what they publish. This bill changes nothing. My experience has shown that making students aware of their liability is a good and necessary part of teaching young journalists. As almost every journalism adviser will tell you, students that feel a sense of ownership for their publications are typically more careful and conscientious about what they publish.

How often are student media organizations sued?
Libel and other content-based lawsuits against student newspapers generally – and high school newspapers specifically – are extremely rare. In fact, to date, there is not a single, reported court decision where a school district has ever been held liable for material published by its high school student media. (If a school district were worried about liability, they would be much better served by ending their football program than worrying about their student media programs.) Still, because school officials frequently cite concern for liability as a primary reason for wanting to retain censorship authority, HB 1307 contains specific provisions that limit a school or college’s liability for student media.

But who will a reader sue if the student newspaper libels them?
It is true that students – who tend to be asset poor – are not generally the most attractive targets for a lawsuit. But limiting their free speech protection because of their limited net worth raises an important question: Should the First Amendment come with an income-eligibility test? The First Amendment has always been a harbor for the minority views of those with less power (and presumably wealth), which, over our country’s history, have included such “unpopular” views as abolition, women’s suffrage and civil rights. Young adults have arguably the most important long-term stake in our country of any demographic group and need to have their voices heard whether or not they currently have the money to make them an attractive defendant in a lawsuit. Also, this law would not prohibit an individual from seeking injunctive relief against student media or student journalists who violate its provisions.

What about all the horror stories you hear regarding what student newspapers or yearbooks have published?
Such incidents have occurred, but they are certainly the exception rather than the rule. Moreover, such incidents tend to occur at schools that lack a qualified or committed journalism adviser. Too often, school officials appoint individuals to advise student media who have no experience or no desire to do so (often brand new hires lacking seniority to object). As the saying goes, you reap what you sow. I only wish some schools put half as much effort into hiring and supporting qualified journalism teachers as they did hiring their sports team coaches. The vast majority of student publications go about their business in a responsible manner. I wish all of you had the opportunity to attend one of the big, national student media conventions. Not only would your “horror” concerns disappear, but you would be truly inspired by some of the best and brightest kids in the country and be amazed by what is possible where a student journalism program is given the tools and support to flourish.

And, frankly, if any school administrator would like to have a head-to-head contest of their student media horror stories against my administrative censorship horror stories, I’ll take that matchup any day.

Isn’t this a liberal (or conservative) issue?
Absolutely not. Free expression protections – and censorship – cut across all political and ideological boundaries. As multiple examples on the SPLC website (www.splc.org) will show, the restrictions placed on student media have been used to censor students who have attempted to include positive material about religion, conservatism and the pro-life movement in their student publications. If conservatives or liberals are not willing to support free speech protections for students for partisan reasons, they should be prepared to face the fact that the views they espouse will, sooner or later, be the ones that are censored.

Why is this legislation so important now?
I have a quote from the noted 19th century educator Horace Mann that I’ve kept posted near my desk for years. It reads:

“The great moral attribute of self-government cannot be born and matured in a day; and if school children are not trained to it, we only prepare ourselves for disappointment if we expect it from grown men.”

It’s frequently said these days that we live in a “new world” that requires a “new balance” between governmental authority and individual rights. If that’s correct, it’s also accurate that now – probably more than ever before – we need our next generation to fully understand and appreciate the liberties at stake in order to participate and help formulate the careful, reasoned and workable balance that they will be required to live under. We currently have in place a system of civics education whose central message is far too often: “look but don’t touch.” House Bill 1307 reminds our youngest citizens that the freedoms they talk about in class or on campus are not just questions to study for an exam, but principles to live by and stand up for. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the “Lower 48,” and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.