The Indiana Publisher

supervision through a school publication. "The price for school administrators would be "a little discomfort" because they might have to deal with phone calls from parents unhappy about a story. Rep. Sheila Klinker, D-Lafay- ette, also spoke in favor of the student press freedom bill. She complimented the testimony of high school students during the bill's hearing before the House Education Committee, which approved the bill, 9-2. Last year, the House passed a similar bill authored by Rep. Clere with an 88-4 vote. Rep. Cook addressed that vote, which included a "yes" by him. "We overlooked the potential consequences of this bill last year – luckily, the Senate squelched this bill," Cook said. (The bill died without a vote on the Senate floor last year.) H.B. 1016 would have merely adjusted the threshold for administrator censorship to situations where the student- created story or broadcast would materially disrupt the operation of the educational process in a high school or college. Colle- giate press freedom has not been an issue. The state universities have testified their support of Rep. Clere's bill.) During questioning of his testimony in the House Educa- tion Committee, J.T. Coopman, executive director of the Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents, admitted his organization would agree to no less than "total control" to prevent student publications from becoming a "public relations nightmare." To combat the allegations of what H.B. 1016 would do, HSPA, the Indiana High School Press Association and Indiana Collegiate Press Association put together the following Myths and Truth about the student press freedom bill. The myths surrounding H.B. 1016 There will be no constraints on student content, opening the door to inappropriate stories. The Truth: The bill did not give students a blank check. School administrators would still hire the journalism-certified instructor and work with instructor and students to develop a yearly publication policy that takes into account community standards and maturity of the readers. The instructor would be required to give the administrator a heads up on any potentially controversial subjects. Administrators would retain the right of prior review before any publication or broad- cast. Administrators could censor inappropriate copy that violated clear standards set out in the bill. Administrators will be unable to block content that will spark fights between different factions in the school. The Truth: The bill clearly gave administrators the power to block content that would "materially … disrupt the operation of the public school. We can all agree the potential for violence fits this framework. Student content will lead to lawsuits against the school districts costing thousands of dollars to defend. The Truth: The bill provided immunity from civil liability for any injury resulting from the student-created content. Thirteen Page 4 February 2018 New Voices Continued from Page 1 Supporters gather at the Indiana Statehouse in anticipation of a third reading and vote on H.B. 1016 Thursday, Feb. 1. Author, Rep. Ed Clere, R-New Albany, passed on the reading until Feb. 5 when the bill was defeated. From left: Former Indiana High School Press Association Director Diana Hadley, Indiana Friends Committee on Legislation lobbyist Bill Chapman, HSPA intern Sarah Elser, HSPA Executive Director Steve Key and current IHSPA Director Ryan Gunterman. Rep. Tony Cook, R-Cicero, and Rep. Ed Clere, R-New Albany, talk in the House Chamber Wednesday, Jan. 31. Clere was the author of H.B. 1016. Cook spoke out in opposition before its defeat Monday, Feb. 5 when it failed to get a 51-vote constitu- tional majority. The final vote was 47 yes, 46 no. A standing room crowd turned out for the Jan. 25 Education Committee morning hearing with H.B. 1016 on the agenda. Supporters and opponents testified before the bill passed out of the committee 9-2 in the afternoon.

• Cover