list and define unacceptable content for posts . Resources :
• Online ethical guidelines
• Create a process for takedown demands . While the legal principles are relatively clear , ethical principles might not be . In ethical decisionmaking , there is typically no right or wrong but is a right versus right decision . Such decisions might depend on the mission and goals of your student media .
The default position is not to take down anything newsworthy or accurate at the time of original publication unless there are clear , definably correct legal reasons : libel , unwarranted invasion of privacy , obscenity . Everything else stays . The reason : If someone on the staff thought it good enough to post once , it should stay .
Maybe establishing guidelines would help students avoid later issues . If material is legally unsupportable or demonstrably inaccurate , the staff would likely , for justifiable journalistic reasons , want to change it .
Original posts and articles also have historical / reality value . In Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel ’ s Elements of Journalism , the first obligation is to publish , no matter the platform , the truth as best we know it . Secondguessing that later , for whatever reason , can set a nasty precedent of what the historical record is . Honoring such requests might also start students on a slippery slope of second-guessing and ultimately self-censorship .
If there is a one-time reason , like something later proven to be untrue , then the student staff could make an exception . These exceptions would , by definition , be rare .
Lastly , just because students agree to take down an item , does not cleanse the Web of the information , image or information .
• Some compromises are okay , according to The Online Privacy Blog . Resources :
• Takedown demands ? Here is a roadmap of
choices , rationale
• Determine who owns media content . One approach suggests individual students own the content ; publication has rights to use but cannot enforce against others who use the works without permission . The other suggests student media own the rights ; students have right to use , but publications can prevent others from using it . To maintain the public form status of student media , the school should not own the rights . Resources :
• Who owns student-produced content ?
Other issues to consider might include :
• Establish guidelines for following and friending people , noting the student ’ s status as a reporter . Friending can be misinterpreted , especially in an election year . Maintaining independence is an important ethical decision .
• Create endorsement guidelines . Especially since this is an election year , student media should know they have the right to endorse issues and candidates . Before they do so , they should establish ethical guidelines and procedures for the endorsement process so the community understands their rationale .
• Develop guidelines on linking . Linking helps show the context and depth of a source ’ s position on issues and background about the group . To be transparent , the staff manual should indicate the reasons why you link and that linking does not equal endorsement .
• Establish guidelines for publishing names and faces . Remember , there is no legal prohibition against using complete identification or photos online or in print . Names and faces are directory information , and thus publishable under FERPA standards .
Setting that foundation , trying to think through as many issues as possible that MIGHT occur and having resources handy when the inevitable unexpected arises are the best steps a staff can take right now .