Tattoo ads pulled from student newspaper
The Wolf’s Howl is the student newspaper at Timberland High School in Wentzville, Missouri. In October, 2009, the principal removed an article and editorial about tattoos. He further announced that tattoo ads in the paper were to be cancelled.
The principal explained that tattoos are in the same category as drugs and alcohol and is therefore subject to censorship. He further commented that most students were under the statutory age limit to get a tattoo without parental permission. In Missouri, you must be 18 to be tattooed unless a parent or guardian is present and signs a written consent.
Timberland High school
The leading case regarding school censorship of student written expression is Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988). The court approved censorship by the school when the expression conflicts with the school’s educational mission. Since a school newspaper is not a public forum, open to anyone, the school may, within reason, restrict its content.
Hazelwood was a Missouri case. It’s interesting that over the past twenty years, the state hasn’t passed a Student Free Expression Law to prevent prior review of high school newspaper content. Perhaps this incident will spark discussion of the subject and possible legislation.
Do you consider tattoos in the same category as drugs and alcohol? Is there a difference that sets tattoos apart from the others, thereby rendering them an acceptable topic? Should the faculty or administration be able to limit the discussion of certain subjects by students in the school paper, yearbook or play? Why or why not?
This post was written by Tom Jacobs. Judge Tom is the founder and moderator of AsktheJudge.info. He is a retired juvenile judge and spent 23 years on the bench. He has written several books for lawyers and judges as well as teens and parents including the recently published 'Teen Cyberbullying Investigated' (Free Spirit Publishing). When he's not answering teens' questions, Judge Tom can be found hiking, traveling and reading.
im a student at timberland and i think the whole thing is rediculous!!! yea, because we want to talk about tatoos, we are suddenly going to go out and get high or drunk… what ever!! that is a bunch of bull. i actually got to see the page that got pulled, and there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. and hes doing the same thing again. yestarday(after papers had been handed out)he pulled the paper because of a picture of a cnacer ribon tatoo (that was less than an inch tall)i could’v MAYBE been ok with his not wanting the picture in the paper, if he hadnt approved the same thing that went to press a week earlier. but he’d already approved the paper. i understand that he does have the authority to check the paper… my own parents are quite aoslute on that topic. but both papers met his reqirements and he’d already given the go-ahead with both. SOMETHING REALLY NEEDS TO BE DONE!!!!
Thanks for the comment.