Over the past weeks, Indiana University Bloomington told student journalists to stop publishing news, fired their adviser when he refused to enforce the rule, and then completely eliminated the 158-year-old print edition of the Indiana Daily Student (IDS).
Administrators attempted to dictate the IDS’s coverage, requiring student journalists to write solely about university-sponsored events, such as Homecoming, rather than covering the news journalists deemed relevant. While Chancellor David Reingold said IU is “firmly committed to the free expression and editorial independence of student media,” Daily co-Editor-in-Chief Andrew Miller told the New York Times: “…fundamentally they are trying to tell us what we can and cannot print.”
The Phoenix, along with many campus newspapers, retains the right to editorial independence and freedom of the press. Events like those that have occurred recently at IU demonstrate the threat to those rights and reflect a broader, nationwide concern regarding the protection of independent journalism.
As part of a larger government “efficiency” initiative, Congress cut $1.1 billion in funding for the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), which supports public radio (especially small local stations). As the White House itself acknowledged, this decision was not purely motivated by a desire for fiscal responsibility, but rather by political resistance to using taxpayer dollars for supposedly biased media. As a direct result of these cuts, dozens of stations shuttered or were forced to lay off most of their staff. This was especially devastating for communities relying on those broadcasts for crucial news and weather reports.
Just as concerning, after threats from Trump-appointed FCC Director Brendan Carr, ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel following his controversial monologue on the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk. In this case, the Trump Administration openly revealed its intention to exert manipulative influence over not only broadcasting publicly funded by the government, but commercial media as well.
While we can’t be entirely sure IU’s decision to cut the IDS was purely political, it mirrors the federal government’s politically motivated weakening of media that is often justified by appeals to fiscal responsibility. According to Reingold, the elimination of the university’s paper was purely a “business decision.” However, the cuts came after the university had already agreed upon a business plan, which accounted for the funding costs of the paper by generating advertising revenue and paying down the paper’s budget deficit. The IDS was also barred from using its $400,000 donation fund, backed by wealthy alumni including billionaire Mark Cuban. Clearly, budgetary concerns weren’t the exclusive (nor likely even the primary) reasons for cutting the IDS.
Some have cited recent critical coverage of the Trump Administration by the IDS as the true reason for its cancellation. In fact, according to a piece published in The Nation last week, IU student media director Jim Rodenbush “wonders if IU felt pressured to keep negative news off campus in order to avoid attention at the state level.” Colleges and universities have felt increasing pressure to adhere to the Trump Administration’s ideological vision; IU itself faced backlash from the federal government over claims of antisemitism and received an influx of attention after rejecting Trump’s funding compact. It seems likely that IDS’s criticism of the federal government has incited fear among the university’s administration about potential federal retaliation.
At a school known for its strong history of student journalism, including the storied IDS and an undergraduate training program, these censoring actions are both disappointing and dangerous.
At many schools, Swarthmore included, while student newspapers are editorially independent, their funding is at least in part allocated by the college in which they are housed. As a result, financial concerns are a convenient mechanism by which college administrations can exert authority over student journalists.
The Phoenix supports the independence of student press across the country. Administrations’ “cost-cutting measures” are badly disguised censorship, and The Phoenix condemns the use of financial pressure from administrations to sanction and control the free press. In a time of so many attacks on academic funding, protest rights, and freedom of the press, we as Swarthmore journalists believe it is our duty to call out violations of rights both on and off of our campus; we are proud to stand with the Indiana Daily Student and the student journalism community.
