Found it (with a hat tip from a twitter buddy)
Nebraska high school journalist refuses to back down, publishes her censored article on Confederate flags and racism at school in local paper
NEBRASKA — In September, Jessica Mathieu, a senior at North Platte High School, in southwest Nebraska, stole a Confederate flag from another student’s pickup truck parked in the school parking lot. She posted a video on social media acknowledging that she had stolen the flag, saying, “I know what I did was wrong, but what you’re doing is worse. You’re making people at your school feel like they’re not welcome.”
She was later charged by police with criminal mischief and unjust stealing.
The week following the incident, Senior Sophia Walsh, Editor-in-Chief of
The Bulldogger, pursued the newsworthy story. Walsh investigated, reported and turned in her piece for edits. After multiple back-and-forths with the principal, and after repeatedly being stonewalled and ultimately censored, Walsh published the piece in the local paper instead.
More than just a flag
Walsh interviewed Mathieu and other students across campus and the administration, and learned that the story was far more complex than simple theft of the flag. Walsh learned that before Mathieu stole the flag, a group of high school students had begun congregating in the school parking lot on Fridays, cars and trucks adorned with pro-Trump, Gadsden and Confederate flags. Mathiu said she stole the flag because, senior Jahmani Sterling, had told her that some of the students with the flags had used racial slurs against him and his brother, both Black students from Jamaica. As Walsh dug further, she learned that Sterling was one of several Black students who reported experiencing racism at school, including in classrooms.
One student shared that in class one day, a group of white students was playing a game of hangman while the teacher was out of the room. The phrase used? “I can’t breathe.”
During her initial investigation, which the administration believed was solely about the theft of the Confederate flag, Walsh received no pushback from the administration. But after Walsh submitted the article to Principal Scott Siegel, for
prior review, she hit a wall. Siegel sent back a first draft to Walsh and marked multiple changes that he said needed to be made prior to publication. She made the revisions and sent it back to him for another round of review. Walsh said that after that, the administration started blatantly stonewalling.
Lori Larson, the adviser for the newspaper, told Walsh that Siegel was unhappy with the piece and referenced “inaccuracies.”
“We searched the story and made sure we credited our sources and made sure to back up what facts we had with credible sources. Then he asked us to share our interview files with him, which we did not,” Walsh stated emphatically. After Walsh pressed for clarification on what Siegel felt was “inaccurate,” Siegel called Larson in for a meeting. After that, Walsh said Larson appeared visibly shaken, and became suddenly reluctant to have the story published in any form.
Walsh said the meeting caused Larson “to feel scared about where she was job-wise, and made her visibly more reluctant about the story.” Larson subsequently told Walsh that her article was no longer “timely,” and she should “move on.” It had been three weeks since she initially turned in her article for review.
Siegel defended his actions, saying in an email that the article was not censored. “In this instance, there were multiple errors and non-factual statements that were addressed with the staff member overseeing our journalism department. Instead of addressing these concerns, the staff member decided to not move forward with the articles.” He continued, “Had said articles been resubmitted after addressing these concerns, they would have been approved.”
Larson declined to be interviewed, saying that she was told by the district’s communication director, Tina Smith, that she was not allowed to comment.
Walsh thinks the administration decided to withhold the article, not Larson. Walsh says she was frustrated and confused by Siegel’s vague criticisms of the piece, because they prevented her from publishing it without telling her what to fix.
“We really just played a guessing game on what needed fixing for each revision,” Walsh said.
Siegel initially agreed to be interviewed for this story, but then backed out. Smith stated that the district had “no additional information to add to the story.”
