A hero without sword or shield

Ombudsman

By Paul McMasters
First Amendment Ombudsman
First Amendment Center
pmcmasters@freedomforum.org

11.27.00

Printer-friendly page

William Lawbaugh

Let me tell you about a true First Amendment hero. This is a real story, not the kind you see on television with formula plots, one-dimensional characters and certain endings. The story is all the more remarkable because the hero in this case is trying to protect the First Amendment rights of others even though he can't claim them for himself.

His name is William Lawbaugh. For 14 years, he has taught journalism at Mount Saint Mary's College, a wonderful institution with a proud history nestled against the Catoctin Mountains in central Maryland.

William Lawbaugh is a spiritual man, and he and his wife have seven children. He has great credentials as a professional journalist but his passion is for the classroom. He holds a doctorate and teaches with verve and erudition. He also serves as adviser to the student newspaper, The Mountain Echo, and the Pridwin yearbook, both award-winning publications. His students call him "Doc."

Doc Lawbaugh, in fact, is just the kind of person you would want in a college classroom, whether you're a student, a parent, or a college president. But for the past year or so, his teaching career has been on hold and his family's finances in disarray. All because he believes in living what he teaches.

Lawbaugh's troubles came about when college officials began to pressure him to exert more control over the student newspaper's content. Apparently, President George Houston and Provost Carol Hinds thought some stories were too "juicy," some Valentine's Day ads too racy, and the writing and editing not as good as it should be.

So they told Lawbaugh to begin reviewing material before it went into the newspaper. Lawbaugh explained that prior review was, in effect, censorship and that he couldn't be a part of that. He pointed out that the College Media Advisers association, for which he served on the ethics committee, considers prior review anathema to good student journalism.

"I find prior review to be an odious practice," says Lawbaugh, "for purely pedagogical reasons. When you try to muzzle young adults, you teach bad journalism and bad civics."

But the president and the provost weren't persuaded, maintaining in effect that officials at a private, religious college have a First Amendment right to deny First Amendment rights to their students and faculty. And they were prepared to assert this prerogative in no uncertain terms.

So they placed a letter of reprimand in Lawbaugh's personnel file. They withheld his annual raise of $3,806. And they denied him a reasonable and fair procedure for confronting the actions against him.

Further, they vilified the students and their newspaper in public, even going so far as to make unfounded charges of mismanagement of student funds. The local newspaper quoted from a letter that President Houston had written, characterizing the student newspaper as "a terrible newspaper," sloppy, inaccurate and poorly prepared. He described the student journalists as "young people who wobble between responsible maturity and pathetic adolescence." (In that same year, the newspaper had won 11 awards for its work.)

It could have been worse. They might have fired Lawbaugh outright. It happens rather regularly to college media advisers, even at public universities, where the First Amendment is supposed to prevail.

At Central Missouri State in Warrensburg, Barbara Lach-Smith was fired from her position after the student newspaper she had advised for six years published stories pointing out that the school's board had given the departing president a three-year contract for $620,000, a one-year leave of absence, special benefits for his wife and computer services.

At Peru State College in Nebraska, student newspaper adviser Matt Mauch says he was fired because the college administration didn't like it when the student newspaper published stories they thought were negative.

And at Fort Valley State University in Georgia, John Schmitt lost his job as adviser to the school newspaper after it published, among other hard-hitting articles, an award-winning story about the questionable financial dealings of a college official at another college before she came to Fort Valley State.

Similar conflicts across the nation are unfolding. Some college media advisers who stand up for their students survive, but the wounds are many and the wins are few.

Even without the First Amendment as sword and shield, Lawbaugh and his students were quite resourceful. They took their story to the community, colleagues and professional organizations.

The College Media Advisers issued a rare censure of Mount Saint Mary's College. Letters of protest came from the American Association of University Professors, the Student Press Law Center, the Society of Professional Journalists, and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

College alumni who used to work on The Mountain Echo formed an organization to mentor and protect their successors; it now has its own Web site and plans on going national.

Perhaps the most significant development, however, was that student editors Justin Moor and Kelley Wilson spent months organizing an all-day "Celebration of the First Amendment" event on campus. They persuaded half a dozen national experts on freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom to travel to Mount Saint Mary's to participate. The president and the provost failed to show.

The student editors plan to collect the transcripts of the presentations by the experts and put them in a handbook for other student journalists facing the problems they have endured.

As for Bill Lawbaugh, he had planned to take leave from his teaching and advising during the coming year but just learned that his superiors have denied his request for the sabbatical. Even so, he has no regrets about putting both his personal and professional life on the line.

Why would he have taken on such a task, knowing it would put both his personal and professional life in jeopardy? Obviously, his students were foremost in his mind. "At times, I feel like this is my final exam, and they are grading me for a change."

But he also had other small colleges like Mount Saint Mary's in mind. "I have received gut-wrenching e-mails and letters from media advisers at sick schools, and they fear this virus will spread to them," he said. "I suspect many college presidents are watching this drama play out, to see if they can get away with shooting the adviser instead of the messenger for content they do not like."

In the end, the power of the president and the provost may prevail, but their example should not.

William Lawbaugh sets an example not only for his colleagues but also his students. He stood up for these young people, put their interests above his own and, and modeled what he teaches. Most importantly, he put his trust in the ability and judgment of the young people he teaches.

As for his superiors, they trashed their own students in public, put their interests above those of their students, and showed they neither trusted nor appreciated their ability and judgment.

Who is the real hero here?

Recent Ombudsman columns

• Is the press guilty of treason?
  Many regard robust exercise of First Amendment rights by either the press or the people as a dangerous problem in the fight against terrorism.08.08.02

• The Supreme Court's 'secondary' thoughts
  While Alameda Books ruling appears to bolster efforts to regulate adult businesses, several justices express concern that evolving secondary-effects doctrine threatens First Amendment.07.30.02

• Putting corporate security before national security
  Government is asking private citizens to take on more responsibilities, but is considering bribing private businesses to enlist in war on terrorism.07.22.02

• Congress must champion access
  Government information must be branded as crucial to democracy, to responsible governance and to freedom.07.11.02

• Denial of access shushes the democratic dialogue
  Some restrictions are warranted to guard against attack, but as government demands more information of Americans, it's asking Americans to demand less information from government.12.12.01

Browse more Ombudsman columns