“You do this, you lose your license:” How Florida high school journalism advisers define and experience censorship now that they can’t say gay 

New Series, Vol. 2, No. 19

Student journalism in secondary schools has many documented benefits for participating students, including voice empowerment, improved academic performance, vocational training, and encouraging civic participation. However, when discouraged from pursuing topics that they are passionate about and/or benefit their communities because those topics may be controversial, students may become disillusioned with the profession of journalism and its contributions to a democratic society. When school administrators attempt to censor student publications, advisers may also experience decreased job satisfaction and might even leave—or be forced out of—the role if they do not comply.  

Censorship of student publications has generally increased in recent years with 21 states passing educational gag orders, defined by PEN America as “an attempt to legislate that certain ideas and concepts be out of bounds.” Seventeen of these laws prohibit instruction related to topics of sex and gender, including Florida’s HB 1557 or the “Don’t Say Gay Law” that prohibits all instruction relevant to sexual orientation and gender identity. Although these laws censor classroom discussions, specifically, individuals may also self-censor in other potential outlets for expressing queer identity and discussing queer issues at school such as the cafeteria, playground, and during extracurricular activities.  

Censorship’s threat to the coverage of stories about sex, sexual orientation, gender, and other topics more broadly in scholastic journalism is well documented in research, with 22.6%-51% of student journalists reporting that they have either experienced or fear censorship. Moreover, 15% of student journalists reported that they did not cover LGBTQIA+ issues, specifically, due to fear of or actual censorship, second only to coverage of drug-related topics (16%).  

Previous research identifies four types of censorship in this context: overt censorship by administration, student self-censorship driven by fear of overt censorship, student self-censorship driven by social pressure to conform, and unconscious censorship that stems from ignorance about harmful social norms that student journalists should seek to challenge. Censorship can lead to a spiral of silence about certain topics as lack of media coverage can create a false impression that an opinion about an issue is not shared by the majority, leading individuals to self-censor ideas perceived as controversial to avoid social isolation.  

Research on the causes of censorship is somewhat mixed. Generally, censorship is driven by some moral conviction that a particular expression is threatening or harmful in some way and therefore must be restricted to benefit the general public. Some research also characterizes self-censorship as an intrinsic trait, while other research favors the influence of external factors on self-censorship. Fear of consequences and job experience are two external factors that influence self-censorship among student journalists and advisers, respectively. Relatedly, most (56.8%) school journalism advisers also want to leave the advisory role, or their position entirely, within five years, with 40% citing censorship as their primary motivation for exit.  

The author conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 high school journalism advisers in the state of Florida, which lasted an average of 51 minutes each. The author initially intended to interview student journalists, themselves, as well, but could not contact them directly due to privacy laws and was also unable to reach students through their advisers. Interview data was analyzed using the constant comparative method, which involves comparing each new piece of data to findings thus far to identify themes and patterns over the course of the analysis, to illuminate how participants defined censorship and how they have experienced censorship post HB 1557. 

All participants defined censorship similarly as “prior restraint” on expression and also used words like denying, blocking, silencing, and limiting to describe censorship. One participant said, “censorship to me is telling my students that they cannot discuss, read, or write on things that are important to them” and another described censorship as “taking away the opportunity [for students] to be able to be heard.”  

External sources such as the government, principals, and other school administrators were identified as the primary sources of censorship—although only one participant described an actual instance of overt censorship. Interestingly, only one participant identified himself as an authority figure who censors his student journalists for reasons ranging from relating to journalistic integrity to his own job preservation. Although other participants described themselves as performing behaviors that the author identified as censorship, participants did not see themselves as censors. Typically, they believed an external authority figure was the true cause of censorship and that their actions were ethical and responsible executions of job-related duties.  

Participants believed that censorship primarily occurs due to the current political climate and personal opinions of authority figures, and often without legitimate reason. Participants also conveyed a chilling effect of HB 1557, in particular, due to its overly broad nature and potential consequences (e.g., employment termination) for violating it. They also believed that HB 1557 influenced students’ self-censorship. Generally speaking, the results indicate that self-censorship is the form of censorship most common in Florida high school journalism programs and that HB 1557 has exacerbated the issue.  

Communication Currents Discussion Questions 

For additional suggestions about how to use this and other Communication Currents in the classroom, see: https://www.natcom.org/publications/communication-currents/integrating-communication-currents-classroom 

ABOUT THE AUTHORS  

Leslie Klein is an Assistant Professor of Practice in the College of Journalism and Mass Communications at University of Nebraska – Lincoln. 

This essay, by R. E. Purtell, translates the scholarly journal article, L. Klein (2025). “You do this, you lose your license:” How Florida high school journalism advisers define and experience censorship now that they can’t say gay. Communication and Democracy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/27671127.2025.2525760  

The full copyright and private policy link is available at natcom.org/privacy-policy/