School paper article on drug use turns into censorship flap

School newspaper stories about drug use at Naperville Central High School are prompting a battle over First Amendment rights and triggering threats of a lawsuit.

Administrators and the Central Times newspaper staff are at odds over use of profanity in the stories and whether the accounts glorify using marijuana.

The package, which appears in the paper's Feb. 28 edition, includes a column opposing drug use, an anonymous first-person account of using and selling drugs, and a story that quotes drug users, a health teacher and statistical evidence about marijuana and its effects.

Editor in Chief Hannah Oppenheimer, a senior who co-wrote the third story, said the newspaper staff doesn't condone drug use. But she said it chose to allow a first-person account from a user to give students a story they don't usually read, especially in a school setting.

She said the combination of the three stories brings proper balance to the issue.

But Principal Jim Caudill said he's concerned the stories, especially the first-person narrative, promote and glorify drug use and could step outside the bounds of what would be expected from a high school newspaper.

The anonymous writer details how he started using marijuana and progressed to selling it. The author contends smoking marijuana is less dangerous than drinking alcohol and calls the feeling "amazing."

Caudill said he's also concerned about the use of profanity in the stories. In the first-person piece and direct quotes in one of the other stories, several such words are used -- some spelled out in their entirety and others only partially.

"We kept them in because we feel it is important to the aspect of this article and because they are real," Oppenheimer said. "They are his words, how he speaks. If you take them out, it would be taking away his voice. As journalists, it's our job to use the truth, and if profanities are included, that's what we're going to say."

Newspaper adviser Linda Kane said the words are no different than language found in books such as "Catcher in the Rye," "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and "Fight Club" that students read in English classes.

She said Caudill is concerned simply because he doesn't want to hear complaints from parents. She said he and most other school administrators "don't know squat" about First Amendment law as it applies to newspapers.

"He is the same old Jim Caudill who is all about PR and doesn't want any bumps in the road," she said.

Caudill said student writers can get their point across without profanity.

"My question is, are we writing a story about marijuana or the language marijuana users use?" he said.

The newspaper's policy, in place since 1992, says, "The Central Times follows the AP (Associated Press) stylebook. It does not print words deemed profane."

It lists several mild expletives that may be used in editorials or opinion pages.

"In other cases," the policy says, "words considered profane will only be used if part of a direct quote and are imperative to the content or meaning of that quote."

Caudill and district administrators are reviewing that policy to determine if any changes should be made regarding profanity.

"I don't want to forecast where we're going with this at this time," he said. "I don't want to get into a situation where we're reading their newspaper (in advance) because I think they do an outstanding job. But I think the lead person (Kane) needs to take more of a supervisory role over what is written here, and that's not the belief that comes from her."

Kane said it's the students' paper -- not hers and not the administration's. She said her job is to guide the students, answer their questions and teach them good journalism, but not to censor them.

"The stuff they (administrators) should be concerned about is the marijuana problem and dealers on campus," she said. "That's just going by the wayside. If they want to hear real profanity, come up to the third floor in the morning and listen to freshmen talking and screaming the f-word."

Oppenheimer said she believes she and Caudill are working amicably toward the same goal of doing what's best for students, even if they don't necessarily agree on the approach.

But if the administration does try to censor the paper's use of profanity, Kane and Oppenheimer say they'll consider a lawsuit and have already talked to the Student Press Law Center.

The center could not be reached after hours Thursday, but on its Web site it says, "If a student publication is a public forum for student expression, then students are entitled to stronger First Amendment protection. School officials are only allowed to censor forum publications when they can show the publication will cause a 'material and substantial disruption' of school activities."

But Martin Redish, professor of constitutional law at Northwestern University, said the school has the right to exercise control over the paper.

"That was argued a while back and the Supreme Court has made it quite clear a school newspaper, even a public school newspaper, is speaking on behalf of the school and the school administration has for all practical purposes total control over its content," Redish said.

This is not the first time the newspaper has butted heads with Central's administration. In 2005, they disagreed over whether Caudill could review stories before the paper was published and Kane threatened to resign.

The two sides reached a compromise at that time that editors would give Caudill a list of the headlines that would be appearing in future editions and added an assistant adviser to the staff.