School officials say the Carlmont High School newspaper could begin publication again early next year after having its journalism program suspended for what was deemed “inappropriate” content.

The suspension centered on a satirical article about a writer’s own “sexiness” and the newspapers staff felt it was being censored for its decision to print it. Carlmont Principal Andrea Jenoff, however, said it was a matter of finding a long-term advisor to guide the students and their work. The situation also brings up the issue of free speech in high school, where students often are just learning the basics of journalism and the First Amendment. Suspending a newspaper for content is against California law, according to the Student Press Law Center.

As first reported by the Daily Journal Nov. 11, officials at the Belmont school decided to suspend the Scots Express Monday but Pat Gemma, superintendent of the Sequoia Union High School District said a newspaper advisor may have been identified and may begin to work with the students in January.

“(Journalism) is a very important piece to the education of youth in a democratic society,” Gemma said.

He said he is establishing a group to develop quality advisors and teachers of journalism throughout the district despite a tight budget. For Gemma, this is an opportunity for the district to evaluate standards in place, learn from best practices and put together quality programs available at all the district’s schools.

“From a district perspective, this is a teachable moment,” Gemma said.

The move comes days after Express editor Alex Zhang and reporter Jack Dooley — who wrote the article in question “Jack Dooley — a beautiful man” — were told the cancellation was the result of the inappropriate story. A letter from the administration echoed those sentiments. Jenoff, however, said the move came from a long struggle to find an advisor.  

Protected speech

If the decision was content based, it goes against California law, explained Frank LoMonte, Student Press Law Center executive director.

Unless the story causes a true disruption, it is protected, said LoMonte, who added canceling the paper is the ultimate form of censorship.

The suspension split opinions of local school officials and students. Overall, the Sequoia Union High School District Board of Trustees seemed supportive of Jenoff’s decision.

“It’s always a touchy issue. It’s a difficult situation. I have complete confidence in Andrea Jenoff in her discretion. She did what she felt was appropriate at the time,” said Trustee Olivia Martinez. “I think sometimes these things get a lot of attention because it’s kind of like the ultimate American value — free speech.”

Trustee Gordon Lewin echoed Martinez’s sentiments adding the courts have recently given administrators discretion in what is disruptive behavior at school sites.

Lewin pointed to a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision about a 14-foot paper sign reading “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” across the street from a high school in Alaska. The 18-year-old student who posted the sign was suspended — a decision upheld by the court.

“It was reasonable for (the principal) to conclude that the banner promoted illegal drug use — and that failing to act would send a powerful message to the students in her charge,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the court’s 6-3 majority opinion.

Board President Lorraine Rumley said the district really values school papers and thinks learning journalism is important for students. But those lessons should include an advisor, she said.

Trustee Sally Stewart felt she did not have enough information from both sides to have a clear opinion.

Students blast decision

Students from other local high school papers however, were not so supportive of the initial decision to suspend publication.

“The last thing a school needs to worry about is a funny, narcissist junior who is responsible only for a lot of laughs. The article is clearly satire to make fun of himself and the vanity of some high school students. I’m sure no student thought this was offensive,” said senior Haley Harrier, editor in chief of Menlo-Atherton High School’s Bear Naked News. “How could the administration take something this funny so seriously and go as far as to eliminate the newspaper?”

Tevye Friedlander, co-editor in chief of Woodside High School’s Woodside World, believed the lack of advisor really was the reason for the decision. He pointed to a number of envelope-pushing articles his own staff produced this year without push back from the administration as proof.

“We’ve almost been asking to be challenged by authority figures, yet the only lasting consequence so far has seemed to be greatly increased readership. So I don’t think the shutting down of the paper had ulterior motives,” he wrote in an e-mail.

At the same time, Friedlander felt shutting down the paper was a terrible decision.

“I strongly believe that students should not only have the right to voice their opinions, but be informed as to the happenings of the school and district,” he wrote.

The Hillsdale High School newspaper is working on an editorial on the decision, said Aniya Atasuntseva, an editor at the paper.

Topic of debate

The topic of students’ right to freedom of speech has been of much debate over the years.

In 1968 the court affirmed a student’s right to peacefully make a symbolic statement. The decision was the result of Tinker v. Des Moines School Board in which three teenagers had worn black arm bands to school in protest of activities in Vietnam and were then suspended for it.

A high school senior, Matthew Fraser, in Washington state gave a speech supporting a friend for a class office in 1983 laced with sexual innuendo but no obscenity. The speech landed Fraser a two-day suspension. Lawsuits escalated until it went before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1986. The court decided a student’s right to freedom of speech is not forfeited by stepping onto a school campus. However, since the speech was given during a mandatory assembly in which students could not avoid the message, and since Fraser was warned of the inappropriate nature of the speech before hand, the court also upheld the two-day suspension. The latter part of the decision was moot since Fraser was well into college at the time and had already served the time.

In the 1980s, a principal erased two stories from a high school newspaper prior to it going to print, one of which included information about teenage pregnancy and interviews from three students who had gotten pregnant. The 1988 decision sided with the school saying the school-funded program was not considered a public forum and its editors were entitled to lower protection under the First Amendment.

That decision was further defined by a 2004 decision in which the court found school officials cannot censor an article based on personal opinion or because it is in its best interest.

California also offers the Leonard Law, which extends First Amendment protections to high school and college students.

The issue of censorship was also raised this week by the American Civil Liberties Union which filed a lawsuit against a Southern California high school for violating free speech rights after scrapping a journalism class and removing the faculty advisor. Two articles — a November 2007 story reporting the superintendent’s alleged refusal to close the high school while there were wildfires in the area, and a May 2007 editorial questioning abstinence-only sexual education — are at the center of the argument.

Heather Murtagh can be reached by e-mail: heather@smdailyjournal.com or by phone: (650) 344-5200 ext. 105.