Ashland Professor Allegedly Ousted for Allowing 'Too Much Investigative Journalism'
After the student paper pressed university officials for interviews, its faculty adviser got into trouble.

In August, Ted Daniels lost his job teaching journalism at Ashland University in Ohio. Why? According to a university official, he was encouraging student journalists to be "overly persistent." The university's paper also reported that officials told Daniels he was allowing the paper to do "too much investigative journalism."
Soon after refusing to renew Daniels' contract, administrators began demanding that students submit issues of The Collegian, the student-run outlet Daniels had advised, for prior review. However, university officials claimed this "decision was predicated on some recent, rather glaring grammatical errors."
Earlier this month, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment nonprofit, wrote a letter to the university, reminding officials that, while Ashland University is a private institution free to construct its own rules around student speech, it has also consistently promised students and faculty free expression rights.
"As a private institution that explicitly guarantees students and faculty the right to freedom of expression, Ashland may not violate academic freedom or chill student journalism by dismissing a journalism instructor for encouraging students to gather the news," FIRE attorney Lindsie Rank wrote in a September 8 letter to the university. "There can be no question that administrative actions against student media in response to what they report or based on disagreement with their newsgathering practices violate any notion of free expression."
Last week, the university's president responded to FIRE's letter, insisting that the university protects and supports student journalism while also defending its required prior review of the student paper. The letter also stated that "Mr. Daniels' transition did not result from the Collegian's reporting."
However, FIRE says the timing of Daniels' ouster suggests his firing was directly related to student press activities, contrary to university officials' statements. The group says that Daniels' ouster was directly related to student press activities, contrary to university officials' statements. "Administrators first suggested nonrenewal mere hours after a meeting between Collegian editors and Ashland Provost Amiel Jarstfer. In the meeting, Jarstfer reportedly criticized the newspaper for its headlines and for not being 'respectful' of 'confidential meetings,' apparently referencing Collegian reporters' attendance at a campus town hall last spring," Rank wrote in a Monday press release. "Daniels' dismissal also came within days of Collegian editor Katelyn Meeks' unsuccessful month-long effort to schedule a back-to-school interview with Campo," the university president.
Even though Ashland University is a private college, there's still good reason to think it has violated student rights.
"Essentially, when a [private] institution has those kinds of policies, courts have found that those kinds of policies create a binding legal contract and that those institutions are then required by law to stick to those commitments of ensuring expressive freedom," Rank told Reason. "Ashland, for example, has been out in the media, touting themselves as this really fantastic place for expressive freedom….Well, it's really dishonest of them to make those kinds of claims and hold themselves out as this bastion of free expression if they're not going to back that up with action."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Weird, because Ashland is the World Headquarters of Nice People. They have a sign that says so.
I believe it. So far they have avoided all of the stupid wokeness that infects other small liberal arts colleges. This is like the only "scandal" I've ever heard from there.
Clerks can write a decision but no Justice has to accept it much less publish it. Inmates don't get to run the asylum
Three cheers for the most idiotic comment of the day. Are you equating the free speech rights of journalists to the lack of rights of incarcerated criminals? And by the way even inmates have free speech rights.
There is an object lesson of what happens when the authority owns the press.
When you say "authority" do you mean "Ashland University" or "Charles Koch"?
I was specifically thinking of media controlled by governments.
>>'Too Much Investigative Journalism'
well ... there's something you don't see @Reason everyday
There was Robbie’s investigation of Mattress Girl? How many years ago?
Don't remember that. Was he on the right side of history and saying she sounded like a lying whore? He has a better batting average than most writers here, but it's still like being the tallest midget playing basketball.
>>contrary to university officials' statements
so you know is truth.
So my right to free speech includes the right to a job, the right to harass others and the right to receive answers to questions I have? They're not being censored but stonewalled and depending on what they're asking and how that might be appropriate.
" demanding that students submit issues ... for prior review"
That's censorship, not stonewalling.
Faculty advisor "lost his job teaching journalism"
That also look a lot more like censorship than stonewalling.
There might have been some (legal and allowable) stonewalling going on, too, but that's pretty clearly not all that was happening.
Ignoring the harassment are you, ok I don't expect honesty from you. I guess editors and managing desks are "censorship" in your world too. Fucking utopian leftists.
They gave no evidence of harrasment beyond student journalists asking for interviews and for answers to questions. If that's harrasment then journalism is illegal.
Stopping a teacher from teaching good journalism also sounds like dereliction of duty by the university, not to mention wrongful termination.
A charitable interpretation of your comment is that it is an intentional misreading of the article. If it is due to ignorance or reading comprehension isssues that reflects rather worse for you.
As FIRE pointed out. The universtity explicitly claimed to give the students and faculty specific rights. These were a contract for students who are paying money, and for faculty that had to decide whether to accept employment.
They can do whatever they want until the explicitly guarentee actions they do not conform to.
It is bait and switch and any student at the school should be entitaled in my opinion to a full refund on all payments to the school if they do not reverse their violation of the contract and stop future violations.
In fairness to the college, a professor teaching his students to persistently engage in investigative journalism is clearly leaving them completely unprepared for a career in the corporate media.
So is this story representative actual journalism where we get to hear both sides of the story or is it advocacy masquerading as journalism the way we just assume UVA violated Jackie Coakley's due process rights and accusations of rape?
Again, are we supposed to think the meta-narrative is that Emma was combing through her Twitter feed when this interesting tidbit about Ashland University came up and she reached out to Ted Daniels, FIRE, the Provost, the Editor, and the School President or do we think that FIRE (partially funded by the Charles Koch Foundation, who also partially funds Cato and Reason) is "litigating" against the University and feeding Emma the facts/narratives that benefits them/their side?
You can't have journalists being too persistent and trying to look at both sides of a story. See, for example, the Washington Post.
Copy/pasting the regime's press releases is good enough.
Can we get more about what the paper was reporting on/investigating? I'm not understanding the nature of what supposed actions led to his ouster. If he was engaging in activism and using students as a proxy in order to harm the school then giving him the boot is justifiable.
Pleaae explain the fucking situation to me instead of telling me how to feel and who I am expected to side with. That is supposed to be what journalists do
You do know this was written by Emma Camp, don't you?
She's lazy, has absolutely no investigative skills, and I don't think she's particularly bright. Get a plum like this in your inbasket from the Fire press release, all you have to do is format it real quick and bank it. Reason work done, she has all the more time to go out and try and convince an adult to buy her a fucking beer.
MasterThief hit the nail on the head.
Telling you how to feel is what 21st century journalists do.
You're doing it all wrong, Mr. Daniels. Journalists aren't supposed to ferret out the truth, they're supposed to support social justice.
I have a friend who is a full professor and department chair at Ashland. He didn't mention any of this. But of course not his department and maybe was not allowed to talk about it.
He is also a donor to FIRE, and he remarked that Ashland avoided so much of the Wokeness that infects other universities. Open inquiry and academic freedom are still paramount. The only real issues at Ashland are too tight of a budget and too many committee meetings.
So my guess is that this story has a lot of spin to it, and we're seeing just one spin. Did the associate direct the students to be overly obnoxious? Harass their subjects? Dunno. But as an associate, he does not have tenure. And free speech, even free expression on campus, does not entail the right of verbal harassment. I really don't know, and the story doesn't really say much either.
p.s. Also, if the college is funding the newspaper, then do they or do they not have a right of editorial review? Again, I'm not sure.
Ask your friend if there is any justification for requiring all artciles to be approved by school admin before publishing. typo's is so obviously a lie. If that were the real reason (zero chance it is). They could say the admin cannot change anything in a student artcile except to correct typo's. And put the in writing. Otherwise it will encourage self censorship either way.
"Grammatical mistakes" Yeah, give me a minute to find my eyes, because I just rolled them so hard they fell out.