The following corrections to the story were made on Sunday, August 31, 2025 at 11:15 A.M. to clarify Toni Albertson’s encounters with previous administration and experiences at various colleges as an educator, and not specifically only at Mt. SAC.
The Silent War on Student Journalism
From the underground student newspapers in the 1960s to today’s digital newsrooms, student journalists have long stood on the frontlines of campus accountability. But behind every bold headline, there’s often been an even quieter battle – one against administrative overreach, censorship, and narrative control.
Even though student press freedoms are protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, public colleges across the country have struggled ever outright refusing to honor those rights in practice. Cases such as Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) are the most often cited, but their legacies remain between blurred lines. While reaffirmed the students right to free expression unless it caused a disruption, Hazelwood created an avenue for administrative control over school sponsored speech. This is a precedent many admin mistakenly apply to college publications, despite courts consistently battling and affirming that free speech in college media, especially at public institutions, have full First Amendment protections.
And yet through the history of trial and tribulations, censorship still persists to this day. But it’s not always as blatant as pulling newspapers off racks, but more often done through subtle, institutionalized tactics. At Mt. SAC, student journalists and faculty say that this battle between the truth and control is nothing new. The newsroom has seen these headlines many times before.
“Call Marketing”
In interviews with SAC Media staff past and present, the same phrase keeps surfacing: call marketing. It’s more than an inside joke in our newsroom. It has become a symbol of tireless years of frustration with administrative interference, especially by the college’s public relations and marketing department.
Former SAC Media advisor Toni Albertson said censorship efforts at Mt. SAC dates back at least a decade. During the Scroggins administration Albertson recalled some of her experiences. “The entire time President Scroggins took over,” Alberson said. “Because prior to that, you had a president named John Nixon who was all about the First Amendment. But from that point after, it was like, call marketing.”
“I even had a student win an award for a cartoon where a campus police officer, in the middle of a crisis, says ‘Call marketing,’” Albertson recalled a former SAC Media staff member who satirized the situation.
Albertson described years of her experiences as an educator though various colleges with editorial stonewalling, PR gatekeeping and administrators undermining student journalists including budget threats and suspected advisor removals. A notable incident at our included manipulating search engine results to redirect media inquiries to college officials instead of SAC Media.
“I went in person to the president and said, ‘What you’re doing is infringing on students’ First Amendment rights.’ He literally said to me,‘Why would we want anything negative about the college?’” Albertson recalled asking Scoggins, “And I told him, ‘Because it’s illegal.’”
This environment has led to fear, confusion, and self censorship concerns among students, especially when those in positions of power, like PR representatives, publicly criticize student journalists on personal social media accounts.
Interview with Mike Hiestand, Student Press Law Center
Mike Hiestand, Senior Legal Counsel at the Student Press Law Center, has seen it all. For over 50 years, the SPLC has offered legal support to student journalists navigating the murky institutional waters.
Hiestand clarified that Tinker v. Des Moines and subsequent rulings have consistently protected lawful, non-disruptive student expression including investigative or critical reporting. “ Not all school officials are the sharpest knives in the drawer. And some of them just come out and say it, ” Hiestand said. “ They think that, you know, ‘we help pay for the paper or we give them a newsroom, clearly we have the right to do what we want with it’ And, they’re not familiar with the law.”
When asked how students can recognize unlawful interference, Hiestand acknowledged the challenge. “ You know, it’s tough. I mean, and it really is one of those things that students come and go. And so it’s a constant. I mean, one of our challenges is, just constantly teaching the same sort of lesson over and over to every generation of journalists that’s out there.” He also noted an alarming trend in recent years. The rise of administrative gag policies. According to Hiestand, “ PR has really been weaponized and I use that word intentionally, against student media and they’re really trying to crack down on some of the things that students are publishing.”
Regarding Mt. SAC, Hiestand didn’t point to one specific legal case but confirmed, “You’re often one of our most frequent callers. We do get a fair share of phone calls from you folks. Hiestand said. “ The journalism that you’re doing. I mean, it’s solid journalism. And you can kind of see why it is that school officials might get a little, you know, exercised at times. Cause I think it’s touching nerves.”
Interview with Toni Albertson, Former SAC Media Advisor
Toni Albertson is no stranger to retaliation. During her time as advisor at various institutions, she said she witnessed direct attacks against student journalists, budget threats, and PR meddling that blurred ethical boundaries.
One notable incident at our campus included an investigation on the manipulation of Google search results to bury SAC Media articles. Albertson said, “ They decided that they would hire a company to do search engine optimization and they put on their marketing on the Mt. SAC website, it says, “Got a story, call us”, and they had it where it looked like it was student media, but it wasn’t.”
She recalled one of her former students being expelled after tweeting criticism of a professor, only to be backed up through SPLC’s legal support. “ So just know you have the power. Students always have the power. They don’t know it.”
Mt. SAC’s History of Censorship
SAC Media’s struggle for editorial independence isn’t new and it’s definitely not isolated. The following incidents that are documented highlight a pattern of administrative behavior designed to restrict, suppress, or bypass student journalism and voices.
Mt. SAC Administration Accused of Covering Up On-Campus Rape (April 2015) by Nick Moore, Albert Serna Jr., Talin Hakopyan
This investigative report revealed troubling allegations that Mt. SAC administrators actively suppressed information related to an on-campus rape case. The article detailed concerns over lack of transparency, potential mishandling of the investigation, and the silencing of staff and students who raised questions. The story helped ignite broader conversations about sexual assault policies at the college and whether the administration prioritized image management over student safety.
Stonewalled (April 2015) by Jennifer Sandy
This piece uncovered how Public Safety and administration interfered with student journalists’ access to basic crime information. The article documented instances where Mt. SAC refused to release Clery Act-mandated crime logs and incident reports, a violation of federal law. It also included firsthand accounts from SAC Media reporters who were denied access, obstructed in their reporting, and given vague or misleading answers by campus officials.
Student journalist at Mt. SAC slapped with conduct complaint after reporting on medical emergency (November 2015) by Tara Jeffries
The Student Press Law Center reported how a Mt. SAC student journalist faced disciplinary action after photographing and reporting on a public medical emergency on campus. Despite the event taking place in a public area and involving public safety officials, the reporter was issued a conduct complaint. The article raised serious questions about retaliation, freedom of the press, and how college conduct policies can be weaponized against student reporters.
Former Student Sues College, Alleges Rape, Coverup by Administration (January 2018) by Cory Jaynes et al.
A former student filed a lawsuit alleging the college failed to properly investigate her rape and actively worked to cover it up. The report describes how officials ignored her claims, failed to provide support, and created a hostile environment. It further exposes how Mt. SAC attempted to quietly resolve the matter while avoiding public scrutiny, with accusations that staff prioritized institutional reputation over justice for the survivor.
Got a Story? Careful Who You Tell it To (June 2018) by Joliana Frausto
This article investigated how Mt. SAC’s marketing and PR department used search engine optimization (SEO) tactics to bury critical articles written by SAC Media. It outlined the administration’s creation of nearly identical headlines and stories to manipulate Google search results and push the student paper off the front page. The report exposed digital censorship tactics and sparked concerns about the manipulation of public information to control institutional narrative.
We Will Not Be Silenced (April 2019) by Brigette Lugo et al.
This collaborative editorial highlighted ongoing efforts by campus public safety officers to intimidate students and prevent them from speaking to reporters, particularly after a campus incident. Students were allegedly told by officers not to talk “especially to the student press.” The article framed these actions as First Amendment violations and affirmed the student journalists’ mission to hold authority accountable, no matter the institutional pressure.
Mt. SAC Releases All But Three Reports (February 2020) by Lily Lopez and Joshua Sanchez
This article investigated the college’s refusal to provide three specific incident reports after SAC Media submitted public records requests. Despite the Clery Act requiring full transparency, the administration claimed exemptions without clear explanation. The report explored how these redactions might be protecting the school from liability, and questioned whether the institution was complying with federal transparency laws.
RE: Does PR Stand for Petty Retaliation? (June 2025) by Morgan Sayfe
This satirical and sharply critical editorial explores the fallout after Mt. SAC’s public relations head left a snarky comment on a SAC Media post, in response to student satire. It questions the ethics of PR professionals weaponizing personal platforms to attack student journalists, and whether such conduct reflects deeper institutional efforts to suppress dissent. The article blends humor, critique, and legal insight to ask: When PR starts clapping back, is it free speech or institutional retaliation?
The fight against censorship in student media is fundamentally a fight to safeguard democracy, transparency, and educational integrity at colleges all across the U.S.
Final Thought
As Mike Hiestand said, “ Just remember what your role is … what you’re doing is important. As a journalist, you’re always gonna get pushback from the powers that be in the places that you’re covering. And so, understanding that is part and parcel of being a journalist.”
With everything happening across the country regarding First Amendment rights, it is imperative and our sincerest hope, from our President to our marketing department, that it recognizes the importance of free speech and open press on our campus. Supporting student journalists and our press may not mean agreeing with every story we publish, but respecting its principles behind it.
As our new Editor-in-Chief, I sincerely urge our administration and our faculty to not only tolerate, but actively stand by student rights in media, even when the story is uncomfortable, critical, or even challenges authority. A true commitment to our ever learning education and democracy means to protect these freedoms, not in theory, but in continuing practice.
Because if press is only “free” when it flatters, then it was never free at all.
Resources and your legal rights as a student journalist
Student Press Law Center (SPLC): Free, confidential legal help for student journalists facing censorship, retaliation, or access denials. Also offers legal guides, training, and updates on student press law cases. https://splc.org
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE): Defends student speech and press freedoms at colleges and universities. Offers legal support, publicity, and resources for journalists under fire. https://www.thefire.org
Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ):Provides ethical guidance, First Amendment advocacy, and a Legal Defense Fund for journalists under threat. Great for student reporters seeking mentorship or support. https://www.spj.org
National Scholastic Press Association (NSPA):Offers training, contests, and resources for student journalists and advisers. Particularly helpful for those in scholastic or early college press. https://studentpress.org
New Voices Movement: A nationwide student-driven campaign advocating for laws that protect student press freedom in every state. Already successful in California and several others. https://newvoicesusa.org
College Media Association (CMA): Provides support, education, and protection strategies for college media advisers and student-led publications. https://www.collegemedia.org
First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: Guarantees the freedom of speech and the press. Public college student journalists are fully protected under this amendment. Courts have repeatedly ruled that college media cannot be censored by administrators simply because content is controversial, critical, or inconvenient.
California Constitution, Article I, Section 2(a): Provides a broad and explicit state-level guarantee of free speech and press rights. It protects every individual’s right to speak, write, and publish freely—including student journalists at public colleges. This provision reinforces and expands upon First Amendment protections within California.
California Education Code § 76120 (State Law): Specifically protects student journalists at California’s public colleges from censorship and disciplinary action. Administrators cannot suppress speech unless it is obscene, libelous, slanderous, or incites unlawful acts. This law makes it illegal for public colleges to fire advisers or retaliate due to student media content.
California Education Code § 66301: Ensures students at public postsecondary institutions have full freedom of speech and press. It prohibits colleges from disciplining students for speech that would be protected off-campus, reaffirming that college students do not lose their expressive rights once enrolled in a public institution.
