Why is MCPS censoring student newspapers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The layers of beaurocracy are already mind numbing in MCPS. It is sad to me that they want to add more layers rather than take some away. Occasional mistakes happen. It’s true that if your goal is to offend no one intentionally or unintentionally, then you are best doing absolutely nothing. They’re making it more and more difficult for students to do anything of substance. Sad this is how the top people in MCPS think

This isn'y about occasional mistakes. This is Taylor's strong-arm control tactic to stifle journalism and criticism of MCPS. It is against state law to do this, not that Taylor bothered to check.

Which law?

This one: https://www.mdcspa.org/new-voices-act.html

[Anonymous]

Taylor has responded to the petition: https://www.change.org/p/stop-mcps-from-censoring-student-journalists-fd94e230-b95c-440d-917b-76596895e941/responses/46915

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I share your affinity for our student journalists and remain so proud of our student journalists.

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) reviewed the open letter submitted by student journalists and faculty advisers regarding misperceptions about the role of school leadership in supervising student publications. The school district issued a memorandum to remind school administrators of their responsibility to supervise students and student publications in alignment with the MCPS’ Student Rights and Responsibilities - as educators, this is our job. Nothing in the memorandum interferes with student journalism or imposes prior restraint.

I can emphatically tell you that no one wants to censor the kids. However, the kids are learning (that's what they are here for) and we would like to avoid some lawsuits and liability when possible.

MCPS remains committed to the legal protections established under the Maryland New Voices Act, which is codified by MCPS in Regulation JFA-RA (Student Rights and Responsibilities). Student journalists retain the right to determine editorial content, which may only be restricted as the law specifically allows. Under the law, it is our responsibility to review for any content that:

• Is libelous or slanderous.
• Constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
• Violates federal or state law.
• Incites students to create a clear and present danger of the commission of an unlawful act; to violate county school board policies; or create a material or substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.

In addition to being our legal responsibility, it is also our fiduciary responsibility to spare the taxpayers by insulating the school system from lawsuits when we know better.

For example, we have had instances at schools where inappropriate content was printed, but not reviewed first, in school yearbooks and other publications, resulting in substantial disruption to school operations and community hurt. Careful prior review could have prevented hurtful impacts to the school community in these instances. Better accountability is our responsibility.

I get that the kids don't like it and want free reign. As responsible adults and educational leaders, we have the duty to guide the work of our students as they are developing their skills in a school setting during a school-directed activity.

Sincerely,
Thomas Taylor

This response is horrifying. It's smug, disrespectful and does not honestly address the concerns raised. If inappropriate yearbook content was the main reason for the memo, then he easily could have distinguished student newspapers from yearbooks. Instead he intentionally used the phrase "student publications" to give him and the system the censorship powers he's precisely looking for.

Furthermore, if avoiding lawsuits is his goal, there are many more meaningful legal liabilities within MCPS that he needs to tighten up that are far ahead of reading and reviewing student newspapers. What a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s because of the Sherwood t-shirt and some bullying comments in yearbook captions.

I’m still confused what the Sherwood T-shirt has to do with this. It was completely blown out of proportion, and it was not the student newspaper that did that, but MCPS CO themselves that leapt to incorrect conclusions that it was racist. Furthermore, that T-shirt design, that was designed by a black student. did go through several administrators, who were black, and the shirt was still approved because there was nothing racist about it.

As far as I know, MCPS central office never issued an apology or clarification to either of the student, who they accused of racism, or the school and community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Taylor has responded to the petition: https://www.change.org/p/stop-mcps-from-censoring-student-journalists-fd94e230-b95c-440d-917b-76596895e941/responses/46915

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I share your affinity for our student journalists and remain so proud of our student journalists.

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) reviewed the open letter submitted by student journalists and faculty advisers regarding misperceptions about the role of school leadership in supervising student publications. The school district issued a memorandum to remind school administrators of their responsibility to supervise students and student publications in alignment with the MCPS’ Student Rights and Responsibilities - as educators, this is our job. Nothing in the memorandum interferes with student journalism or imposes prior restraint.

I can emphatically tell you that no one wants to censor the kids. However, the kids are learning (that's what they are here for) and we would like to avoid some lawsuits and liability when possible.

MCPS remains committed to the legal protections established under the Maryland New Voices Act, which is codified by MCPS in Regulation JFA-RA (Student Rights and Responsibilities). Student journalists retain the right to determine editorial content, which may only be restricted as the law specifically allows. Under the law, it is our responsibility to review for any content that:

• Is libelous or slanderous.
• Constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
• Violates federal or state law.
• Incites students to create a clear and present danger of the commission of an unlawful act; to violate county school board policies; or create a material or substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.

In addition to being our legal responsibility, it is also our fiduciary responsibility to spare the taxpayers by insulating the school system from lawsuits when we know better.

For example, we have had instances at schools where inappropriate content was printed, but not reviewed first, in school yearbooks and other publications, resulting in substantial disruption to school operations and community hurt. Careful prior review could have prevented hurtful impacts to the school community in these instances. Better accountability is our responsibility.

I get that the kids don't like it and want free reign. As responsible adults and educational leaders, we have the duty to guide the work of our students as they are developing their skills in a school setting during a school-directed activity.

Sincerely,
Thomas Taylor

This response is horrifying. It's smug, disrespectful and does not honestly address the concerns raised. If inappropriate yearbook content was the main reason for the memo, then he easily could have distinguished student newspapers from yearbooks. Instead he intentionally used the phrase "student publications" to give him and the system the censorship powers he's precisely looking for.

Furthermore, if avoiding lawsuits is his goal, there are many more meaningful legal liabilities within MCPS that he needs to tighten up that are far ahead of reading and reviewing student newspapers. What a joke.

+1

I'm so disgusted by this. "I get that the kids don't like it and want free reign."

How about "I get that Taylor doesn't like accountability and wants free reign."

TT needs to go F himself

[Anonymous]

It's free rein, not free reign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's free rein, not free reign.

Double entendre there. It's free rein and free reign for King Thomas Taylor.

The condescension in his letter - Thomas knows best, right? At least in his own mind. Well, I hope the students sue, because I don't believe that Thomas thinks state law applies to him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because of the Sherwood t-shirt and some bullying comments in yearbook captions.

I’m still confused what the Sherwood T-shirt has to do with this. It was completely blown out of proportion, and it was not the student newspaper that did that, but MCPS CO themselves that leapt to incorrect conclusions that it was racist. Furthermore, that T-shirt design, that was designed by a black student. did go through several administrators, who were black, and the shirt was still approved because there was nothing racist about it.

As far as I know, MCPS central office never issued an apology or clarification to either of the student, who they accused of racism, or the school and community.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Taylor has responded to the petition: https://www.change.org/p/stop-mcps-from-censoring-student-journalists-fd94e230-b95c-440d-917b-76596895e941/responses/46915

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I share your affinity for our student journalists and remain so proud of our student journalists.

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) reviewed the open letter submitted by student journalists and faculty advisers regarding misperceptions about the role of school leadership in supervising student publications. The school district issued a memorandum to remind school administrators of their responsibility to supervise students and student publications in alignment with the MCPS’ Student Rights and Responsibilities - as educators, this is our job. Nothing in the memorandum interferes with student journalism or imposes prior restraint.

I can emphatically tell you that no one wants to censor the kids. However, the kids are learning (that's what they are here for) and we would like to avoid some lawsuits and liability when possible.

MCPS remains committed to the legal protections established under the Maryland New Voices Act, which is codified by MCPS in Regulation JFA-RA (Student Rights and Responsibilities). Student journalists retain the right to determine editorial content, which may only be restricted as the law specifically allows. Under the law, it is our responsibility to review for any content that:

• Is libelous or slanderous.
• Constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
• Violates federal or state law.
• Incites students to create a clear and present danger of the commission of an unlawful act; to violate county school board policies; or create a material or substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.

In addition to being our legal responsibility, it is also our fiduciary responsibility to spare the taxpayers by insulating the school system from lawsuits when we know better.

For example, we have had instances at schools where inappropriate content was printed, but not reviewed first, in school yearbooks and other publications, resulting in substantial disruption to school operations and community hurt. Careful prior review could have prevented hurtful impacts to the school community in these instances. Better accountability is our responsibility.

I get that the kids don't like it and want free reign. As responsible adults and educational leaders, we have the duty to guide the work of our students as they are developing their skills in a school setting during a school-directed activity.

Sincerely,
Thomas Taylor

This response is horrifying. It's smug, disrespectful and does not honestly address the concerns raised. If inappropriate yearbook content was the main reason for the memo, then he easily could have distinguished student newspapers from yearbooks. Instead he intentionally used the phrase "student publications" to give him and the system the censorship powers he's precisely looking for.

Furthermore, if avoiding lawsuits is his goal, there are many more meaningful legal liabilities within MCPS that he needs to tighten up that are far ahead of reading and reviewing student newspapers. What a joke.

I gasped when I got to the "I get that the kids want free reign (sic)...." portion because I'm accustomed to authority figures at least pretending to respect the young people entrusted to their care.

I've been a little on the fence about Taylor, thinking that he was given a difficult job and maybe needed a bluff approach to just do what needed to be done and what several prior supers had failed to do.

However, more and more, he just seems like a bully. Moreover, he's a bully whose actions are on track to get NDI sued the moment an administrator censors a piece about the Central Office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because of the Sherwood t-shirt and some bullying comments in yearbook captions.

I’m still confused what the Sherwood T-shirt has to do with this. It was completely blown out of proportion, and it was not the student newspaper that did that, but MCPS CO themselves that leapt to incorrect conclusions that it was racist. Furthermore, that T-shirt design, that was designed by a black student. did go through several administrators, who were black, and the shirt was still approved because there was nothing racist about it.

As far as I know, MCPS central office never issued an apology or clarification to either of the student, who they accused of racism, or the school and community.

It wasn't racist as in an attack on anyone, but it was a bad choice of font for the effect they were going for (and I don't understand the main logo art), and I can't directly blame any individual for the society-wide mass psychosis around the radioactive sensitivity of the n-word, even if unintended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's free rein, not free reign.

Double entendre there. It's free rein and free reign for King Thomas Taylor.

The condescension in his letter - Thomas knows best, right? At least in his own mind. Well, I hope the students sue, because I don't believe that Thomas thinks state law applies to him.

You can't win a suit on the basis of merely thinking someone might break a law in the future.

Taylor can't stop dripping with condescension every time he speaks though. Half of his problem is his utter disrespect for the people who agree with him and his mischaracterization of their valid concerns.

He's a walking charicature of a brutish father, who wins every argument with a child by saying "because I'm the father". He doesn't understand that he's a civil servant working for people, many of whom are smarter and better educated than he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Taylor has responded to the petition: https://www.change.org/p/stop-mcps-from-censoring-student-journalists-fd94e230-b95c-440d-917b-76596895e941/responses/46915

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I share your affinity for our student journalists and remain so proud of our student journalists.

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) reviewed the open letter submitted by student journalists and faculty advisers regarding misperceptions about the role of school leadership in supervising student publications. The school district issued a memorandum to remind school administrators of their responsibility to supervise students and student publications in alignment with the MCPS’ Student Rights and Responsibilities - as educators, this is our job. Nothing in the memorandum interferes with student journalism or imposes prior restraint.

I can emphatically tell you that no one wants to censor the kids. However, the kids are learning (that's what they are here for) and we would like to avoid some lawsuits and liability when possible.

MCPS remains committed to the legal protections established under the Maryland New Voices Act, which is codified by MCPS in Regulation JFA-RA (Student Rights and Responsibilities). Student journalists retain the right to determine editorial content, which may only be restricted as the law specifically allows. Under the law, it is our responsibility to review for any content that:

• Is libelous or slanderous.
• Constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
• Violates federal or state law.
• Incites students to create a clear and present danger of the commission of an unlawful act; to violate county school board policies; or create a material or substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.

In addition to being our legal responsibility, it is also our fiduciary responsibility to spare the taxpayers by insulating the school system from lawsuits when we know better.

For example, we have had instances at schools where inappropriate content was printed, but not reviewed first, in school yearbooks and other publications, resulting in substantial disruption to school operations and community hurt. Careful prior review could have prevented hurtful impacts to the school community in these instances. Better accountability is our responsibility.

I get that the kids don't like it and want free reign. As responsible adults and educational leaders, we have the duty to guide the work of our students as they are developing their skills in a school setting during a school-directed activity.

Sincerely,
Thomas Taylor

This response is horrifying. It's smug, disrespectful and does not honestly address the concerns raised. If inappropriate yearbook content was the main reason for the memo, then he easily could have distinguished student newspapers from yearbooks. Instead he intentionally used the phrase "student publications" to give him and the system the censorship powers he's precisely looking for.

Furthermore, if avoiding lawsuits is his goal, there are many more meaningful legal liabilities within MCPS that he needs to tighten up that are far ahead of reading and reviewing student newspapers. What a joke.

Ugh, he is so condescending. As the parent of a student journalist who signed the open letter, I find his constant use of "the kids," when MCPS communication typically refers to "students" and not "the kids," to be intentional. By referring to them as "the kids" he makes them seem immature and not worth listening to. So dismissive. He is just awful.