Students Turn Against Free Press

[Brainster]

I have been smirking all day at the silly story coming out of Northwestern University. Jeff Sessions was speaking on campus and the student daily covered the protests. They texted individuals involved in the protest and asked for interviews. They took photographs of the protests and included them in their tweets about the event.

And then the excrement hit the fan. Apparently, the students involved did not like their photos being posted, and disapproved of being contacted. And instead of standing up for the freedom of the press, the newspaper groveled instead:

On Nov. 5, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions spoke on campus at a Northwestern University College Republicans event. The Daily sent a reporter to cover that talk and another to cover the students protesting his invitation to campus, along with a photographer. We recognize that we contributed to the harm students experienced, and we wanted to apologize for and address the mistakes that we made that night — along with how we plan to move forward.

One area of our reporting that harmed many students was our photo coverage of the event. Some protesters found photos posted to reporters’ Twitter accounts retraumatizing and invasive. Those photos have since been taken down. On one hand, as the paper of record for Northwestern, we want to ensure students, administrators and alumni understand the gravity of the events that took place Tuesday night. However, we decided to prioritize the trust and safety of students who were photographed. We feel that covering traumatic events requires a different response than many other stories. While our goal is to document history and spread information, nothing is more important than ensuring that our fellow students feel safe — and in situations like this, that they are benefitting from our coverage rather than being actively harmed by it. We failed to do that last week, and we could not be more sorry.

Some students also voiced concern about the methods that Daily staffers used to reach out to them. Some of our staff members who were covering the event used Northwestern’s directory to obtain phone numbers for students beforehand and texted them to ask if they’d be willing to be interviewed. We recognize being contacted like this is an invasion of privacy, and we’ve spoken with those reporters — along with our entire staff — about the correct way to reach out to students for stories.

It almost reads like something from the Onion, or the Babylon Bee, doesn't it? The response from the mainstream media has been pretty scathing. The school daily was simply reporting an event of some significance that happened on campus, as was their supposed function. There was nothing to apologize for and it is somewhat shocking that students at a highly rated journalism school would not understand this.

Keep in mind that the "harm" and "trauma" that the students experienced appears to be that Sessions was allowed to speak on campus.

 

[d4m10n]

This is reminiscent of the safe spaces carved out against journalism at Mizzou some years back:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...sters-force-media-out-of-safe-space-quad.html

 

[Checkmite]

It almost reads like something from the Onion, or the Babylon Bee, doesn't it?

Ummm....not really even close?

 

[cullennz]

Ummm....not really even close?

Kind of is tbf

Bunch of fragiles get fragile, then get even more fragile when someone shows a photo of them acting embarrassingly fragile.

Maybe they should have just hid out in their "Safe space" till the "bad man" left.

 

[Checkmite]

On one hand, as the paper of record for Northwestern, we want to ensure students, administrators and alumni understand the gravity of the events that took place Tuesday night. However, we decided to prioritize the trust and safety of students who were photographed. We feel that covering traumatic events requires a different response than many other stories.

Some of our staff members who were covering the event used Northwestern’s directory to obtain phone numbers for students beforehand and texted them to ask if they’d be willing to be interviewed. We recognize being contacted like this is an invasion of privacy, and we’ve spoken with those reporters — along with our entire staff — about the correct way to reach out to students for stories.

Neither of these sentiments is ridiculous or outlandish, or sounds like something that would be a parody of what "real" journalism is supposed to be.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

There is no expectation of privacy in public spaces.

In spaces owned by a legal entity, the owner can allow or not allow photography at their discretion. Knowing that before entering the space is up to the individual.

Using such images for profit always requires consent, but journalism is afforded more leeway in this respect. Many outlets will still seek a consent form if an individual is the "subject" of the image, but that doesn't apply in "wide shots" of an event.

ETA: a lot of camera operators ask you to state and spell your name before recording a statement to cleverly establish tacit consent that you are ok being identified.

 

[cullennz]

There is no expectation of privacy in public spaces.

In spaces owned by a legal entity, the owner can allow or not allow photography at their discretion. Knowing that before entering the space is up to the individual.

Using such images for profit always requires consent, but journalism is afforded more leeway in this respect. Many outlets will still seek a consent form if an individual is the "subject" of the image, but that doesn't apply in "wide shots" of an event.

ETA: a lot of camera operators ask you to state and spell your name before recording a statement to cleverly establish tacit consent that you are ok being identified.

Yeah

At actual pre-booked things with groups they also usually put signs up saying things like

"On ###### date at ###### time there will be people taking photos/filming. If you wish to not be filmed or not have photos of yourself published please contact ######### or the photographers/filmers"

 

[xjx388]

Neither of these sentiments is ridiculous or outlandish, or sounds like something that would be a parody of what "real" journalism is supposed to be.

Can you explain what was "traumatic" about the event? Can you explain why it's wrong for a newspaper reporter to take photos of a protest and use them as part of their story?

And investigating a story by finding people to talk about it is an "invasion of privacy?"

 

[smartcooky]

True to form, the OP title was click-bait.

This has nothing at all to do with "Students Turn Against Free Press" and has everything to so with "Students Stand Up for their Privacy Rights"

 

[Chris_Halkides]

feeling safe

At Reason.com Robby Soave wrote, "Absent from the piece is any attempt to explain how covering the event, and taking pictures of it, undermined the physical safety of students. Reading between the lines, I gather that consuming news or seeing pictures relating to the event was deemed psychologically scarring by some activists in the marginalized community, and this is the harm the paper's editors wish to avoid in the future. If so, reporters would be unable to cover any event that involves even the slightest public controversy."

Scott Greenfield noted that, "They took photos of a public protest." He went on to quote the editorial, "...nothing is more important than ensuring that our fellow students feel safe..." He also wrote, "But it’s one thing to have some angry passionate kids bent on destruction who prefer to wear black (and masks), and another to have a college newspaper abandon its most basic responsibility, to report the facts, and beg on their knees not to be canceled by their fellow students for doing journalism."

One thing that is unclear to me is why they first named a student then deleted the student's name. Did they not ask the student whether or not he or she wished to be quoted?

 

[xjx388]

True to form, the OP title was click-bait.



This has nothing at all to do with "Students Turn Against Free Press" and has everything to so with "Students Stand Up for their Privacy Rights"

The journalists looked at the public student directory to find people who were seen at a public, newsworthy event. How is this anything to do with privacy rights?

 

[smartcooky]

The journalists looked at the public student directory to find people who were seen at a public, newsworthy event. How is this anything to do with privacy rights?

On Nov. 5, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions spoke on campus at a Northwestern University College Republicans event

Here, let me help you to spot the disconnect!

 

[cullennz]

True to form, the OP title was click-bait.

This has nothing at all to do with "Students Turn Against Free Press" and has everything to so with "Students Stand Up for their Privacy Rights"

And then squeal like little kids when someone takes photos of it

 

[xjx388]

Here, let me help you to spot the disconnect!

The campus is a public place.

 

[cullennz]

Not sure how it works in other countries, but here it is campus grounds public (as they are publicly funded), but certain buildings on the campus aren't.

Or rooms in certain buildings that are public buildings.

 

[smartcooky]

The campus is a public place.

Not always.

In this case, Northwestern University is a private institution not a public one.

It would be interesting to see, if you went onto a private university campus with a camera and started photographing students, how long it would be before someone from campus security questioned why you were there, and who gave you permission to be there.

 

[cullennz]

Not always.

It would be interesting to see, if you went onto a university campus with a camera and started photographing students, how long it would be before someone from campus security questioned why you were there, and who gave you permission to be there.

It would depend who you are.

A nobody pretty quick.

The press ring up first and are usually alright as long as they get permission.

Unis actually like to promote themselves.

They are mini businesses in their own right and splash their academics knowledge and image all oer the place.

 

[Ziggurat]

Not always.

It would be interesting to see, if you went onto a university campus with a camera and started photographing students, how long it would be before someone from campus security questioned why you were there, and who gave you permission to be there.

Why is that relevant? A photographer for a student newspaper taking pictures of an open campus even doesn't need permission to be there.

 

[cullennz]

I have no idea why except for me being an idiot, but thought it was an outside paper not a uni one.

In which case, at least here Ziggurat is right.

Any of them can photo bomb the place.

Common sense would probably get them to ask permission to post them though.

 

[xjx388]

The campus is a public place.

Let me head off, the “Nuh-uh! Northwestern is a private uni!” This event was free and open to the public; therefore, there can be no expectation of privacy.