UNC-Chapel Hill is misapplying the FERPA student privacy law to withhold public records that could help journalists shed light on the way the university does, or does not, punish students found liable for sexual assault, an SPLC legal brief argues.
A recent opinion by the Virginia Supreme Court illustrates just how closely requests for teacher-specific information can be scrutinized, and drives home the importance of carefully considering an open-records request before making it.
The now-resolved Rolling Stone libel case provides a roadmap of avoidable hazards that future journalists can observe when covering sensitive campus stories.
Fellows in the SPLC-funded initiative design and carry out locally tailored projects aimed primarily at addressing the "press freedom gender gap" that afflicts K-12 schools.
The SPLC board will launch a nationwide search to replace Executive Director Frank LoMonte, who is leaving after nine years to head a press-freedom think-tank at the University of Florida.
The University of Wisconsin-Superior launched an investigation into its student newspaper’s April Fools’ Day edition last week.
The Illinois New Voices bill would extend First Amendment protections to high school journalists. College journalists in the state are already protected.
The principal was suspended for three days without pay because she did not censor an issue of the student newspaper that had explicit language and partially-nude photos.
Contrary to the image of college sports as a moneymaker, most athletic programs (even championship-caliber powerhouses) rely on student fees and grants from their parent institutions to make ends meet. Recent investigations by The Washington Post and The Chronicle of Higher Education have captured the enormity of the growing financial burden that athletics imposes on debt-strapped students.
Students' First Amendment right to wear T-shirts with social or political statements is a fiercely disputed issue that regularly ends up in court. A new ruling from Tennessee adds to the consensus that speech on a T-shirt cannot be banned as "disruptive" just because it addresses an issue of social controversy such as LGBT rights.