In protest of administrative bureaucracy, unclear policy changes—some that are clearly censorship—and the appointment of a Publications Coordinator (PC), who has exercised some poor choices, I am resigning as editor-in-chief of the Matrix. After a successful year in which the Matrix and its staff won many awards as well as the respect of many in the MSC community, I find the work situation untenable for the Matrix staff and me.

In fact, while some of us will continue to write for the paper, the entire Matrix editorial board has decided not to return in leadership positions next year. This decision was not arrived at easily. The board and I have tried to work things out by speaking with administration, faculty advisors and the Publications Committee. However, the situation continues to worsen. When I brought my concerns to the “powers that be,� I often left the meetings feeling frustrated at the fact that the students are considered to be just passing through MSC. Therefore, I felt that no merit was given to my concerns for the present and future student media.

During a meeting with Dean McCraney, I was asked why I was having so much trouble with the PC. My response was that he was condescending to my staff and that we had no respect for his decision-making skills. Time has proven that we were correct in our assessment.

The most serious concern I have is with the poor judgments and actions of the PC during a recent student media trip. The students did not want to ride to Savannah with the PC, so they opted to carpool.

He sent an email stating that we would not be compensated for our travel since transportation was provided by the school, most students agreed that this was an expense they were willing to incur. However, some students were not financially able to make such a choice and ultimately had to ride with the PC. The students were subjected to wrong turns, speeding and cussing by the PC.

After stopping for dinner in Dublin, they set out for Savannah only to realize—upon seeing the sign for Gray Hwy—that they were travelling the wrong way.

After turning around and setting out for Savannah once more, the PC was pulled over for speeding. There was no ticket written, although the students report that they were driving at speeds close to 90 mph.

Once in Savannah, the PC was stressed out over the fact that he didn’t know his way around the town. Students riding with him report that he used the F-bomb many times (a fact they found ironic since he had publicly chided me for using the word bullshit in a previous meeting).

MSC policy doesn’t allow students to use this type of language, why can staff? He should be setting a good example for the students in both actions and words. Surely speeding and cussing on a school-sponsored trip is not acceptable behavior.

I encouraged the students who were involved to take their complaints to Dean McCraney, however, I believe they chose to remain silent rather than risk possible repercussions. During my time at MSC, I have found its faculty and staff to be people of integrity. However, I can no longer make this blanket statement.

Another source of contention centers on control of the ad revenue raised by students but unfairly subject to administration’s approval. Although my advisors previously approved the purchase of interior bins for placement on campus and in the community, the PC denied the request. He stated that our paper was not good enough to warrant the purchase of the bins and he would not recommend investing $500 in the Matrix until we improved.

I consulted Adam Goldstein, attorney for Student Press Law Center (SPLC), who said this was a clear case of censorship, stating that the PC’s decision to hold funds until he saw improvement was a “content-based decision� and, therefore, illegal. He offered to find us representation should we decide to take legal action.

I chose not to take legal action. Instead I requested that ad revenue, not MSC funds, be used to purchase the bins. I was informed that the ad revenue was also subject to the approval of the PC and he still would not approve purchase of bins. The administration did not want our publication circulating in the community. They finally offered a compromise: if the paper improved throughout the spring, the purchase of bins would be reconsidered—yet another illegal content-based decision.

I met with the Publications Committee about the dictatorial attitude of the administration and their surreptitious actions of censorship. I left frustrated at the fact that Student Life has so much input and control over a student publication that is supposed to be a product of the students, providing a forum for students to voice their opinions.

With administration having control over the purse strings, the Matrix will never adequately represent the students. Instead it will be a hybrid of MSC public relations and student voice. Although administration and the Publications Committee cannot seem to understand the relationship of content-based decisions and censorship, the fact remains that they have set themselves up to be sued.

According to the Society for Professional Journalism (SPJ), on their Web site at www.spj.org/rrr.asp?ref=19&t=ethics, “federal courts have ruled repeatedly that it is a violation of student editors’ First Amendment rights to interfere with the independence of campus papers at public universities. That holds despite the fact that the university may be providing direct or in-kind support — a newsroom, for example — to the paper.� Adam Goldstein, SPLC, advised me that this statement also applies to Student Life funds and ad revenue.

The SPJ quotes Paul McMasters, First Amendment ombudsman for the Freedom Forum, who attributes problems of censorship to “‘longstanding and unfortunate perception of campus officials that the campus media should be a public relations tool’ for the university, rather than vehicles in which future newspaper reporters and editors are learning the craft of journalism.�

In fact, Ft. Valley State University was censured for dismissing the advisor of their student media when he refused to censor the content of the paper.

According to www.collegemedia.org, “the censure [was] later removed after adviser won a court judgment and after college revamped its operating procedures to protect students and advisers in the future.�

The policy changes that have been implemented since our tenured advisor’s departure have not encouraged Matrix reporters or editors to learn the craft of journalism. Instead, they have greatly hindered the paper and are perilously close to censorship. And the PC’s poor social skills lowered the morale of the media students.

Our meetings were riddled with the PC’s critical observations, as well as lectures of how it is out in the “real world.� These unwelcome interjections were belittling and condescending. Students didn’t want to come to meetings any longer and, eventually, I resorted to holding meetings in the library. The entire staff felt scrutinized and wondered what we had done to warrant such a change in attitude toward us.

The PC also began to rewrite the Matrix handbook without consulting any of the staff—fashioning it after Kennesaw State University. When my managing editor questioned this, the response he received indicated that this change was inevitable regardless of what we thought. My managing editor resigned immediately, warning me that things could only get worse. But I wasn’t ready to throw in the towel.

My staff and I endured many more instances than I have listed. I tried to stay professional and not take it personally—until I received an email that seemed very passive-aggressive. While at the New York seminar, I received an email from the PC listing, for my information, the amount of money that the Matrix and Fall Line Review had spent to send me to various seminars. No other media student received such an email.

In the past, the editor-in-chief and his/her staff has enjoyed the freedom to make decisions regarding the direction of the paper. Dr. Fennelly supported, and taught his students about, the First Amendment. He was our defender when administration ventured too close to censorship. However, in his absence and with new advisors who do not have tenure, our defense system has grown weak.

Our advisors adhere to the statement in the RSO handbook that advisors should be a “compass and not a rudder,� pointing the direction in which the paper should be headed, but allowing the students to arrive at the destination through their own initiative. They make suggestions, not directives. Recent policy changes indicate that Student Life does not support the “compass and not a rudder� mindset.

These are only some of the problems that the Matrix staff has encountered this year. A member of the editorial board stated his frustration in an email response to the PC, “Unfortunately, students not being told the correct procedure to follow is a recurring issue in the student media programs . . . the Student PC should not constantly serve as a stumbling block and often as an adversary to students who are voluntarily giving their time in an effort to improve MSC. This is simply another example on a very long list illustrating the difficulties that student media leaders have had to face since early last semester. Working on a student publication should not be as unnecessarily laborious as it currently is, and students should not have to spend nearly as much time as I have this year in trying to navigate through bureaucratic red tape. Frankly, if things continue on their current path, I don’t see how MSC student media can continue to grow and improve next year.�

I feel that most of these problems are a result of growing pains and poor planning. Hopefully, administration and the Publications Committee will take measures this summer to limit the reach and authority of the PC regarding student media.

Steps need to be taken to restore authority of the advisors. They should be allowed to support the student publication and its board without fearing for their jobs.

Also, the student publication staff should be allowed some latitude in making decisions related to ad revenue.

Additionally, a Media Panel should be created to provide a democratic outlet for conflict resolution. It should be comprised of faculty, student leaders and journalists in the community.

I am proud of the publication that we have produced this year; it has been consistent, relevant and informative. Our hard work has resulted in positive feedback from the MSC community. As “little fish in a big pond,� we have earned awards for first and second place this year—something that hasn’t happened in many years.

My goal in writing this letter is not to create controversy, but to bring these problems to light to effect changes that will benefit t students today and tomorrow. To silently step away from the Matrix would be to condone the changes and actions of this year and I cannot do that.

I want to thank my advisors for supporting us as much as they comfortably could. I also want to give a special THANKS to my staff for their hard work and for sticking it out the entire year, even in the face of adversity.

Although I am stepping out of a position that requires ongoing contact with the PC, I am looking forward to writing for the Matrix and representing the interests of all students. I hope that I have set a good example for MSC students to stand up for what they believe to be right and to use the Matrix as a place to voice their opinions.

Respectfully,
Jenny Murr
Editor-in-Chief

written by Jenny Murr