Purdue distances itself from student newspaper, will no longer help with campus distribution
Student journalists working at the The Purdue Exponent, First Amendment advocacy organizations and community members say the decision is likely to suppress student journalism and readers' ability to access information — drawing concern over the freedom of the press enshrined in the First Amendment.
"This goes back to Purdue trying to sideline the Exponent and control that source of information," former Exponent editor Seth Nelson said. "The more you separate the student newspaper from the campus ecosystem and from the Purdue brand, the easier it is for you to control the message."
Purdue's Office of Legal Counsel told the Exponent's publisher and editor in an email sent May 30 that it would no longer help distribute the biweekly paper on campus, citing an expired facilities contract.
Previously, the Exponent worked with university employees to deliver papers to racks during early morning hours when many campus buildings are locked. The letter said the Exponent still could deliver the papers to stands "on a non-exclusive, first-come, space-available basis."
Purdue also told the 135-year-old publication, which is trademarked as "The Purdue Exponent" through 2029, that it should omit the university's name moving forward. It also pulled Exponent staff's ability to purchase parking passes at a campus garage.
The university stood by its decision in a June 5 statement, saying the Exponent is a private business and Purdue doesn't provide such support to other media organizations.
In the email, Purdue said the basis for its decision is a contract that expired in 2014. The parties had still honored the terms of the agreement for the last 11 years. The Exponent said in its statement it had attempted to renew the contract for years, while the university email said it has no intention to enter into a new contract.
The day after the Exponent's June 5 public statement critiquing the decision, publisher Kyle Charters said the Exponent and Purdue have had "quality conversations" on the matter.
The university's decision drew ire from many in the local community who say the publication, which is staffed by about 125 students during the school year, is one of the best outlets for in-depth Purdue coverage. Many local news outlets have experienced reductions in resources and staff needed to inform the area of about 110,000.
Charters said this decision impact students who opt to write for the Exponent.
Though independent, the student publication is lab for students to learn journalistic skills regardless of their major. The publication's work has often been recognized for excellence by the state chapter of the Society for Professional Journalists.
Purdue's action also caught the attention of First Amendment watchdog organizations such as the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
"Purdue's actions reflect a betrayal of the press freedom our Constitution requires it to uphold," said Dominic Coletti, a program officer on FIRE's campus advocacy team. "The university's commitment to institutional neutrality does not require it to abandon its relationship with the Exponent."
Nelson, the former editor who will be a senior at Purdue this fall, said the university's move isn't an act of overt censorship but demonstrates the university is attempting to hinder the independent publication's ability to do its job.
There's not one news item he can point to that would have inspired this decision, but Nelson said it's rather the school's uneasiness with an independent news source so close to campus.
"It's a larger multi-billion dollar organization that is leveraging its weight and power to suppress the voice of a student newspaper," he said. "Of course, that's a First Amendment issue."
Despite the changes, the Exponent is planning for business as usual. The distribution plan has been shifted to address the new challenges in the interim, and the smaller team of student journalists will continue producing news over the summer.
"We're going to continue to do what we do and that is cover the news," Charters said.
The USA TODAY Network - Indiana's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Texas university's drag show ban blocked by appeals court
An appeals court has temporarily blocked a West Texas university's ban on drag shows, citing the First Amendment. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in an Aug. 18 ruling said a district court erred in rejecting a request for a preliminary injunction that would prevent West Texas A&M University, near Amarillo, Texas, from enforcing its ban while a lawsuit works its way through the courts. Spectrum WT, a LGBTQ student group at the school, was organizing a March 2023 drag show to raise funds for The Trevor Project, a suicide prevention organization that serves LGBTQ youth. University President Walter Wendler canceled the show days before the performance, saying a 'harmless drag show' was 'not possible,' in a university-wide letter Wendler also posted on his website. Wendler wrote that the fundraiser was for a 'noble cause' but that drag shows 'stereotype women in cartoon-like extremes for the amusement of others and discriminate against womanhood.' He also compared drag performances to blackface performances, saying he would similarly not support such events on campus 'even if told the performance is a form of free speech or intended as humor." The plaintiffs, represented by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), sued Wendler and other school officials and requested a preliminary injunction to prevent the school from stopping such performances while litigation continued. A district court denied that request in September 2023. But the appeals court disagreed in a 2-1 decision and granted the preliminary injunction, saying the plaintiffs showed a 'substantial threat of irreparable harm to their First Amendment rights absent an injunction against President Wendler.' Judge James C. Ho dissented, saying that 'like blackface performances, drag shows violate the university's fundamental mission to ensure a welcoming educational environment for all.' 'Tellingly – and quite understandably – the majority does not contend that West Texas A&M would be required to allow a student group to put on a blackface performance,' Ho wrote. 'The result should not be different here just because drag shows find favor in certain circles.' FIRE applauded the decision, which it said 'restored the First Amendment' at the school. 'This is a victory not just for Spectrum WT, but for any public university students at risk of being silenced by campus censors,' FIRE Supervising Senior Attorney JT Morris said. A West Texas A&M spokesperson said the university does not comment on pending litigation. BrieAnna Frank is a First Amendment reporter at USA TODAY. Reach her at bjfrank@ USA TODAY's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Noblesville school didn't violate anti-abortion student's rights, court finds
The Seventh Circuit court has upheld that Noblesville High School leaders did not violate a student's rights when they suspended her anti-abortion rights club for not following school policy. In 2022, a student and her parents sued the district, claiming a dispute over posting flyers violated their daughter's First Amendment and Equal Access Act rights. They argue that the decision to veto her flyers and suspend the club was "driven by hostility to her pro-life views." The school maintained it was not discriminating against her beliefs and was instead upholding its policy that student clubs' wall postings remain content-neutral. "The record shows that school officials approved (the student's) club, reasonably accommodated her speech, and suspended the club only for neutral, conduct-related reasons," Judge Nancy Maldonado wrote in the Aug. 14 ruling. Marnie Cooke, a spokesperson for Noblesville Schools, said in a statement that the district was appreciative of the ruling. She said the school supports their students in "forming clubs they're passionate about," which span "a wide range of a wide range of interests, activities, and beliefs." Jordan Butler, a spokesperson for Students for Life of America, was critical of the court decision in a statement, saying it "undermines the First Amendment — an amendment that protects all speech, including pro-life voices." 'I Am the Pro-Life Generation' In 2021, a student gained permission to start a chapter of Students for Life of America at Noblesville High School. The goal of the group's campus clubs is to "change minds of their peers" and advocate for public policy, according to the national organization's website. To advertise the first meeting, the student submitted flyers to school officials for approval. She pulled them from a template the national organization dispersed, which includes blanks to fill in with meeting details and photos of students holding signs saying 'Defund Planned Parenthood' and 'I Am the Pro-Life Generation." According to court filings, school administrators repeatedly told the student to revise the flyer to solely include meeting information. They asked her to omit the photos to comply with the school's content-neutral rule for wall postings. After the student's mother, Lisa Duell, met with leaders to urge the flyer's approval, the school became concerned the club was not entirely student-run, according to court documents. Principal Craig McCaffrey then suspended the chapter as an approved student club after an "attempt at insubordination led by an outside adult advocating with the student.' He said the student could reapply in January 2022. She did, and the club was reinstated. The school and the student reached an agreement to allow the club to continue operating while the lawsuit moved through the courts. Judges: No First Amendment violation In March 2024, Judge Sarah Evans Barker of the Southern District of Indiana ruled in favor of the school district, saying there was no constitutional injury as a result of a policy or decision. Students for Life previously alleged that Barker had a bias in favor of abortion rights in a failed attempt to have her removed from the case. President Ronald Reagan appointed Barker. After the case was appealed to the Seventh District, Judges Frank Easterbrook, Candace Jackson-Akiwumi and Maldonado heard arguments in October 2024. Easterbrook was appointed by Reagan, and the latter two by Joe Biden. In the court's Aug. 14 ruling, they agreed with Barker, writing that the policy and its enforcement do not violate the First Amendment. Schools generally can limit speech that could be construed as their own, which the court said includes the limited public forum that is its walls. It also found that, based on the handling of other political student clubs, the school did not treat the student's club any differently. "The District could reasonably conclude that covering its walls with warring political messages would undermine that order and divert attention from the business of learning," Maldonado wrote. "It passes constitutional muster." The USA TODAY Network - Indiana's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. Have a story to tell? Reach Cate Charron by email at ccharron@ on X at @CateCharron or Signal at @ This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Noblesville High didn't violate anti-abortion student's rights: Court Solve the daily Crossword
Indianapolis Star
2 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Noblesville school didn't violate anti-abortion student's rights, court finds
The Seventh Circuit court has upheld that Noblesville High School leaders did not violate a student's rights when they suspended her anti-abortion rights club for not following school policy. In 2022, a student and her parents sued the district, claiming a dispute over posting flyers violated their daughter's First Amendment and Equal Access Act rights. They argue that the decision to veto her flyers and suspend the club was "driven by hostility to her pro-life views." The school maintained it was not discriminating against her beliefs and was instead upholding its policy that student clubs' wall postings remain content-neutral. "The record shows that school officials approved (the student's) club, reasonably accommodated her speech, and suspended the club only for neutral, conduct-related reasons," Judge Nancy Maldonado wrote in the Aug. 14 ruling. Marnie Cooke, a spokesperson for Noblesville Schools, said in a statement that the district was appreciative of the ruling. She said the school supports their students in "forming clubs they're passionate about," which span "a wide range of a wide range of interests, activities, and beliefs." Jordan Butler, a spokesperson for Students for Life of America, was critical of the court decision in a statement, saying it "undermines the First Amendment — an amendment that protects all speech, including pro-life voices." In 2021, a student gained permission to start a chapter of Students for Life of America at Noblesville High School. The goal of the group's campus clubs is to "change minds of their peers" and advocate for public policy, according to the national organization's website. To advertise the first meeting, the student submitted flyers to school officials for approval. She pulled them from a template the national organization dispersed, which includes blanks to fill in with meeting details and photos of students holding signs saying 'Defund Planned Parenthood' and 'I Am the Pro-Life Generation." According to court filings, school administrators repeatedly told the student to revise the flyer to solely include meeting information. They asked her to omit the photos to comply with the school's content-neutral rule for wall postings. After the student's mother, Lisa Duell, met with leaders to urge the flyer's approval, the school became concerned the club was not entirely student-run, according to court documents. Principal Craig McCaffrey then suspended the chapter as an approved student club after an "attempt at insubordination led by an outside adult advocating with the student.' He said the student could reapply in January 2022. She did, and the club was reinstated. The school and the student reached an agreement to allow the club to continue operating while the lawsuit moved through the courts. In March 2024, Judge Sarah Evans Barker of the Southern District of Indiana ruled in favor of the school district, saying there was no constitutional injury as a result of a policy or decision. Students for Life previously alleged that Barker had a bias in favor of abortion rights in a failed attempt to have her removed from the case. President Ronald Reagan appointed Barker. After the case was appealed to the Seventh District, Judges Frank Easterbrook, Candace Jackson-Akiwumi and Maldonado heard arguments in October 2024. Easterbrook was appointed by Reagan, and the latter two by Joe Biden. In the court's Aug. 14 ruling, they agreed with Barker, writing that the policy and its enforcement do not violate the First Amendment. Schools generally can limit speech that could be construed as their own, which the court said includes the limited public forum that is its walls. It also found that, based on the handling of other political student clubs, the school did not treat the student's club any differently. "The District could reasonably conclude that covering its walls with warring political messages would undermine that order and divert attention from the business of learning," Maldonado wrote. "It passes constitutional muster." The USA TODAY Network - Indiana's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
