Student Publications Must Get Prior Review, MCPS Memo Says
by Evelyn San Miguel ‘26
In a memo sent to MCPS principals on March 19, Chief of Schools Peter Moran outlined new guidelines for students, advisors, and administrators on the subject of student-run publications. Released just days before spring break, the memorandum demands strict guidelines for what can and can not be published or promoted. Including yearbooks and spiritwear, the policy requires that a school administrator must review any school-sponsored media prior to publication or release, with the implication that a school administration will be able to make suggestions or request changes.
This memorandum comes after a tumultuous couple years at Sherwood, with the most recent senior shirt incident just a few months ago circulating immense debate about the county’s standards for review of school-sponsored products and publications. In the last year Sherwood also experienced controversy around a senior quote published in the yearbook, which was quickly redacted with a white sticker.
Upon its release, newspaper and yearbook advisors throughout MCPS expressed deep concerns about the new policy. Administrative review is generally against commonly expressed journalistic principle, but currently Maryland has no laws against having an administrator simply read a publication prior to print. The New Voices Act — passed by Governor Larry Hogan in 2016 in conjunction with the Student Press Law Center (SPLC) and other student advocate groups — explicitly dictates protections against censorship of student-produced school sponsored media, such as newspapers, magazines, and broadcasts. Most concerns lie within whether the policy abides by the standards written in the New Voices Act.
In a separate memo released on the same day, Moran outlined specific guidelines for the memorandum, most of which contain similar wording to the Student Code of Conduct. Principals or administrators must watch out for derogatory/offensive language, sexually explicit or suggestive content, and content that promotes drugs, among others. It also advises to watch for anything that could qualify as bullying or “inside jokes” that could be teasing. The guidelines contain no specific distinctions among elementary, middle, or high school levels, and minimal guidance on how administrators should coordinate with their advisors.
According to the SPLC, a school administration insisting that a student publication make changes is censoring students’ voices, which would be a clear violation of The New Voices Act. School officials can demand changes to content only if it violates MD law, such as material that may be profane, vulgar, lewd, or obscene, or with a clear intent to harass, threaten, or intimidate.