FREE-PRESS LIMITS

When the student editors at Blue Springs South High School decided to demonstrate how retailers sell cigarettes to minors, they thought they were exercising good journalism. But when the students found two stores willing to sell them cigarettes, they ran into a roadblock with the story. The principal decided the story shouldn't include the names of the two retailers. Instead of deleting the names, the students chose to run a headline with blank space underneath.

Thus a story by aggressive, young reporters turned into a test of wills. The students wanted to make a statement concerning free-press rights by running the blank space. The principal wanted to exercise a sense of responsibility that is incumbent on those in authority who must submit to community criticism when certain boundaries are crossed.

For the most part, the students' view that they were unfairly censored has been supported by newspapers across Missouri on their editorial pages. Missouri is, after all, home of another case several years ago in which the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately decided that the principal at Hazelwood High School had the authority to impose certain restraints on student publications.

But the Supreme Court was cautious about its decision and seemed to favor cutting off students' access to free speech only in the most extreme circumstances. It isn't easy deciding when to give students a free hand and when to rein them in. Most educators would like to give students as much leeway as possible to learn from their mistakes as well as their successes. Exposing student editors to the community's wrath in certain situations is one area where all principals might not agree.

But it needs to be said that young editors -- and older ones as well -- all work within a framework of limits. No editor has license to be irresponsible. This is a good lesson for student journalists to have an opportunity to learn.

Student publications that aren't supported by a school district and aren't part of a school's curriculum or extracurricular acitivites actually enjoy wider access to publish what they want without restraint. These alternative publications are generally responsible only to the student who have the wherewithal to put them together, print them and distribute them. The Supreme Court has been clear in its rulings that such publications cannot be barred from schools.

In any event, students exposed to situations like the one in Blue Springs learn valuable lessons that mirror the real world better than those publications whose main purpose is to avoid the quagmires of tough decisions.