The business of transparency
The Shield created a bit of a buzz on campus when an advertising insert for Southern Illinois University Carbondale tumbled out of the Feb. 26 edition.
To complicate matters, the ad, which promotes SIUC’s new offer of in-state tuition for students in Indiana and four other states, was placed on the stands just in time for another Southern Hospitality Days.
I spent the day seeking the answer to this question: “Should a university’s student newspaper allow a competing university to advertise?”
I posed the question to my colleagues from the College Media Advisors, a national organization of student newspaper advisors to which I belong.
I received eight responses from advisors at state universities who said their newspapers accept advertising from other universities. One of those advisors even asked me for the contact information for the person at SIUC who placed the ad – her paper wanted the revenue.
An advisor at a private college was the only person who said the student newspaper had a policy against running ads for other schools.
I also learned the same ad that ran in The Shield ran in seven other student newspapers.
I turned to the Student Publications Policy Manual to see if the students had overlooked an existing policy. Here is the newspaper’s advertising policy:
“All decisions regarding the types of advertising accepted by The Shield are at the discretion of the editorial board. The board may prohibit publication of any advertisement it deems inappropriate.”
Until last week, we had only measured “inappropriate” advertising based on whether an ad is offensive, jeopardizes the health and safety of students, or is prohibited by law. To our knowledge, The Shield has not previously been approached by another school to advertise undergraduate programs.
In light of this new category – competition from other schools –The Shield editorial board convened Thursday afternoon to review the policy. (The editorial board is composed of the editor in chief, managing editor, the copy editor, and all section editors. The advisor is present for editorial board meetings but does not have a vote).
After a lengthy discussion and debate, they voted to leave the policy as is except for a procedural modification that clarifies how the advertising and editorial departments communicate about questionable advertising materials.
The policy as written allows future editorial boards (which change every academic year) to interpret what is or is not appropriate.
If you are interested in reading the student’s rationale for their decision, you can find it on the opinion page in this week’s edition of The Shield.
One of the most common arguments The Shield makes when criticizing decision makers is the lack of transparency in the decision-making process. I’ve seen them do it time and time again.
As an advisor, I always remind them they also wield a significant amount power – the power of the printed word.
So when they write an opinion, make a decision, or run a controversial ad, I’m quick to remind them to hold themselves to that same standard of transparency.
POST CONTRIBUTED BY: ERIN GIBSON, instructor in journalism and advisor to The Shield.