A SILENT 'ECCO'
Essex County College shuts down controversial student newspaper
Sergio R. Bichao & Lev D. Zilbermints
Issue date: 10/3/05 Section: News
It's been one month into Melinda Hernandez's first full year as editor of Essex County College's student newspaper, but she hasn't published a single issue. The problem is that the at the end of last semester, administrators at the two-year college shut down the paper. The college says they did it because the paper doesn't have a faculty advisor. Student editors say administrators just don't want a newspaper that will criticize the school.
Trouble for the Essex County College Observer, commonly called "The ECCO," began last April when the newspaper suddenly changed its look and published criticism of the two-year public institution and its administrators.
By the time the June issue was ready to be published, the Dean of Student Affairs had already told the printers that the school would not pay to publish the issue.
When editors found out about this they agreed to put up $1,100 of their own money to print the unsanctioned graduation issue of the ECCO, which they were barred from distributing inside the campus.
Since then, the administration has refused to allow the newspaper to publish any further issues and even cut the ECCO's annual allocation of $10,000 by half.
Administrators say that this is a matter of the paper not having an advisor. But the editors say that the college took issue with the advisor only after the paper began to "question authority."
CONTROVERSY OVER CONTENT
Soon after the April issue hit the stands, Hernandez was called into Dean Susan Mulligan's office and chastised for not "clearly labeling" an opinion piece as an editorial and also for using the word "battle" in an article about a student government dispute with the dean.
The editorial was written by a former college employee who said he was fired from his concession stand job for refusing to sell cigarettes to a pregnant woman. Mulligan objected to the editorial's "one-sided view," said Hernandez.
"The administrators said the paper 'shouldn't be used for students to rant,'" Hernandez said.
Mulligan also complained to Hernandez about a news article in which she used the word "battle" to describe a conflict between the dean and the student government over election results. Hernandez said Mulligan thought the word "battle" made the situation seem "negative."
Until that point, the newspaper had been operating without an advisor, which is required by their constitution and by college policies. But Mulligan only made an issue of the advisor after the April issue, the editors say.
"ECCO is dedicated to finding out the truth on certain issues and the school simply can't handle true journalists being an outlet for the students," Hernandez said.
Former managing editor Joel Shofar said the ECCO's "new attitude is what freaked [the administration] out."
"It was becoming an aggressive and pro-active student newspaper and that is not what the administration wants. They do not want the students to have a voice or to have a paper to have power to question their authority," Shofar said.
Mulligan brushed aside the claims of censorship in comments to InsideHigherEd.com, saying that the newspaper is ineligible for student funds simply because it doesn't have an advisor or the necessary number of staff.
"If this paper is going to represent the college as a student newspaper, I don't see two people [Hernandez and Shofar] being representative of the whole college and the paper's constitution seems to agree with that point of view," Mulligan said.
ALLEGE INTIMIDATION
Hernandez and Shofar believe that Mulligan has used intimidation to keep the paper from getting an advisor and, in the end, coming out.
The editors say that they found a faculty member to be their advisor last year, but the advisor told the editors that Mulligan suggested that he not apply for the position.
The Observer made several attempts to reach Mulligan to ask her why she turned away the ECCO's advisor, but Mulligan was never available for comment by press time.
"Now nobody wants to be our advisor because they see that no one else will do it," Hernandez said.
Shofar also claims that the college somehow "lost" his grades for the semester after the June issue, making him inelligible to work for the ECCO until his instructers re-submit his grades.
Shofar thinks that his missing grades may have something to do with hisinvolvement in the paper.
The Observer's own advisor, George Garneau, who is not a member of the Rutgers faculy and serves at the pleasure of the Observer and its Media Board, says that from what the ECCO editors are saying, they're experiencing a "classic case of censorship."
"It is clear that administration makes it impossible to publish. They fire the advisor and cut the [newspaper's] budget. That is a textbook case of censorship," said Garneau.
Hernandez said that she has been in touch with the Student Press Law Center to see what she and her staff can do about getting their newspaper back on the presses.
Trouble for the Essex County College Observer, commonly called "The ECCO," began last April when the newspaper suddenly changed its look and published criticism of the two-year public institution and its administrators.
By the time the June issue was ready to be published, the Dean of Student Affairs had already told the printers that the school would not pay to publish the issue.
When editors found out about this they agreed to put up $1,100 of their own money to print the unsanctioned graduation issue of the ECCO, which they were barred from distributing inside the campus.
Since then, the administration has refused to allow the newspaper to publish any further issues and even cut the ECCO's annual allocation of $10,000 by half.
Administrators say that this is a matter of the paper not having an advisor. But the editors say that the college took issue with the advisor only after the paper began to "question authority."
CONTROVERSY OVER CONTENT
Soon after the April issue hit the stands, Hernandez was called into Dean Susan Mulligan's office and chastised for not "clearly labeling" an opinion piece as an editorial and also for using the word "battle" in an article about a student government dispute with the dean.
The editorial was written by a former college employee who said he was fired from his concession stand job for refusing to sell cigarettes to a pregnant woman. Mulligan objected to the editorial's "one-sided view," said Hernandez.
"The administrators said the paper 'shouldn't be used for students to rant,'" Hernandez said.
Mulligan also complained to Hernandez about a news article in which she used the word "battle" to describe a conflict between the dean and the student government over election results. Hernandez said Mulligan thought the word "battle" made the situation seem "negative."
Until that point, the newspaper had been operating without an advisor, which is required by their constitution and by college policies. But Mulligan only made an issue of the advisor after the April issue, the editors say.
"ECCO is dedicated to finding out the truth on certain issues and the school simply can't handle true journalists being an outlet for the students," Hernandez said.
Former managing editor Joel Shofar said the ECCO's "new attitude is what freaked [the administration] out."
"It was becoming an aggressive and pro-active student newspaper and that is not what the administration wants. They do not want the students to have a voice or to have a paper to have power to question their authority," Shofar said.
Mulligan brushed aside the claims of censorship in comments to InsideHigherEd.com, saying that the newspaper is ineligible for student funds simply because it doesn't have an advisor or the necessary number of staff.
"If this paper is going to represent the college as a student newspaper, I don't see two people [Hernandez and Shofar] being representative of the whole college and the paper's constitution seems to agree with that point of view," Mulligan said.
ALLEGE INTIMIDATION
Hernandez and Shofar believe that Mulligan has used intimidation to keep the paper from getting an advisor and, in the end, coming out.
The editors say that they found a faculty member to be their advisor last year, but the advisor told the editors that Mulligan suggested that he not apply for the position.
The Observer made several attempts to reach Mulligan to ask her why she turned away the ECCO's advisor, but Mulligan was never available for comment by press time.
"Now nobody wants to be our advisor because they see that no one else will do it," Hernandez said.
Shofar also claims that the college somehow "lost" his grades for the semester after the June issue, making him inelligible to work for the ECCO until his instructers re-submit his grades.
Shofar thinks that his missing grades may have something to do with hisinvolvement in the paper.
The Observer's own advisor, George Garneau, who is not a member of the Rutgers faculy and serves at the pleasure of the Observer and its Media Board, says that from what the ECCO editors are saying, they're experiencing a "classic case of censorship."
"It is clear that administration makes it impossible to publish. They fire the advisor and cut the [newspaper's] budget. That is a textbook case of censorship," said Garneau.
Hernandez said that she has been in touch with the Student Press Law Center to see what she and her staff can do about getting their newspaper back on the presses.