Aleisha Robinson, Editor-in-Chief, MSU Spokesman
Morgan State University has tightened its rules on how students, faculty and staff may speak to the press, shifting from language that once advised campus community members to coordinate with the school’s public relations office to rules that now require it.
The change, reflected in two emails from the Office of Public Relations and Strategic Communications (OPRSC) sent 20 months apart, has raised concerns among student journalists and press-freedom experts about increased administrative control over campus media.
The 2024 email, sent to students, staff and faculty told the Morgan community that all filming requests “should be coordinated” through OPRSC, language that suggested strong guidance but left room for individual departments or student outlets to operate with some autonomy.
The new message, sent to faculty and staff only, issued Nov. 13, 2025, replaces that advisory tone with firmer directives: filming requests “must be coordinated and approved” through OPRSC, and all media inquiries, including those from student outlets, “must be directed” to the office.
The revised policy also names specific student media organizations The MSU Spokesman, and BEAR TV as well as WEAA (88.9 FM), the university’s owned and operated NPR radio station, placing them in the same category as external press when seeking interviews related to university operations.
In both messages, OPRSC affirms that it is the only office authorized to issue official statements on behalf of Morgan State.
Larry Jones, director of Morgan State University’s Office of Public Relations and Strategic Communications, said the policy applies to all members of the campus community.
“If a member of the university is contacted by media, their responsibility is to direct that individual to the Office of Public Relations,” Jones said. “That applies to faculty, staff, and student media when it’s about official university statements.”
Jones clarified that he does not believe the recent change in wording reflects a shift in protocol.
“There has been no change in the protocol,” said Jones. “All media requests must come through the Office of Public Relations. That’s always been the policy, whether the email says ‘should’ or ‘must.’” said Jones.
He emphasized that the shift from ‘should’ to ‘must’ in the new email does not create a new rule, but rather clarifies the existing protocol.
“The ‘must’ in the new email doesn’t signify a new rule,” said Jones. “It just clarifies that any media requests, from student outlets or external press, need to be coordinated through our office.”
Still, critics argue that the stricter language could have broader implications for press freedom on campus.
“This policy would not be something the university could constitutionally impose,” said Dominic Colepti, student press program officer for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).
Leon Wilmer, a Morgan political science professor, said the university’s updated media rules do not inherently violate the First Amendment.
He argued that public institutions may impose certain procedural requirements on speech, particularly when they can be held responsible for statements made under the university’s name.
“Not all speech is free,” Wilmer said.
“With Morgan State University being an institution of higher learning and a business, it is responsible for statements made not only by faculty and staff but also by students and I don’t think that it is onerous or burdensome to have students that want to engage in media activity that will reflect upon the institution to have those requests cleared through the public relations department,” said Wilmer.
Wilmer continued saying the political environment also shapes how universities manage public communication.
He argued that institutions like Morgan face greater scrutiny for statements made under their banner and may take extra measures to avoid sanctions or misinterpretation.
“Especially in this current political climate, where you have an incredibly reactionary administration that is attacking and sanctioning institutions that articulate a narrative different from the mainstream, the university wants to be sure that things being said under the banner of Morgan State University are consistent with its regulations,” said Wilmer.
Colepti said the shift from advisory to mandatory language creates a constitutional issue.
“A lot of universities have policies like this, but the way they make it acceptable is to make it an encouragement or an offer: you can come talk to our PR office if you don’t know how to handle an interview request. Not: you must come talk to the PR office whenever you get an interview request. That ‘must’ language is the exact problem here,” said Colepti.
Morgan’s protocol mirrors controversies at other universities, where PR offices attempted to position themselves as gatekeepers for all employee communication, often triggering First Amendment concerns.
In 2018, a report by student journalists at the University of North Alabama described how faculty and staff were reminded not to speak to reporters without PR approval.
Interviews revealed that some employees felt monitored, others said they feared retaliation, and student reporters described being redirected away from sources or denied access altogether.
In the 2018 article, Frank LoMonte, then-director at the Brechner Center for Freedom of Information at the University of Florida, said that these policies create an “intimidating climate,” especially for employees who may want to criticize university policies or serve as whistleblowers.
He emphasized that PR offices often lack the legal authority to issue binding policies but frequently behave as though they do, a dynamic student reporter at UNA said made their reporting significantly harder.
In the same year, FIRE sent the University of North Alabama a letter criticizing an unwritten media protocol that required all employees to route press inquiries through the communications office before speaking.
The protocol, which faculty said had been enforced inconsistently over the years, became a flashpoint after a police chief said he was “not allowed to speak directly to the media” without administrative review.
Adam Steinbaugh, FIRE’s director of individual rights, warned that UNA’s restrictions amounted to an unconstitutional prior restraint, citing the First Amendment’s core purpose to protect free expression from administrative approval systems.
Steinbaugh argued that the protocol was vague, unwritten, and placed employees at risk because they had no clear sense of what was permitted, a dynamic that could silence speech entirely.
The concerns FIRE raised then confusion, fear of discipline, reduced transparency, and obstruction of student journalists echo the deeper structural questions now emerging at Morgan State about who controls communication, who can speak, and what approval power PR offices should have.
Under the updated guidelines, even requests unrelated to official university matters if conducted on campus require OPRSC clearance.
That additional step may delay reporting or restrict access to sources who might otherwise speak openly.
Morgan State’s revised media policy arrives amid growing national scrutiny of restrictive communication rules at public institutions.
A 2019 issue brief by the Brechner Center found that blanket requirements forcing public employees to seek permission before speaking to the press are frequently deemed unconstitutional.
The Brechner Center documented more than 20 court cases in which government agencies lost challenges after trying to enforce broad pre-approval interview policies.
Courts have repeatedly ruled that public employees retain rights to speak about their work especially on matters of public concern without routing comments through public relations offices.
LoMonte, of the Brechner Center, has argued that no public institution has successfully defended a “gag-style” requirement that all media contact be cleared through PR.
He warns that funneling all communication through a single office can lead to “sanitized” information and hinder journalists’ ability to gather accurate, unfiltered news.
The Center’s findings suggest that Morgan’s move from advisory wording to mandatory approval could place the university among public institutions whose policies have raised constitutional concerns.
Eric T. Kasper, director of Menard Center for Constitutional Studies at the University of Wisconsin, stressed that the mandate can impede on constitutional rights depending on how it’s enforced based on precedents set by historical court cases.
Kasper added the protocol itself, whether it’s enforced or not, has the potential to cause a “chilling effect” on any protected expression due to vagueness or anticipated retaliation and could be brought to court as a facial challenge.
Universities nationwide are increasingly centralizing control of public messaging, mirroring practices in K–12 school districts and government agencies.
Press-freedom organizations argue that such policies can chill speech, deter whistleblowers and limit transparency particularly in public institutions accountable to taxpayers.
Jones emphasized that student media are treated the same as external outlets.
“We treat (student media) like any other (outside) media outlet,” said Jones. “There’s no special privilege. Just because you’re a student reporter doesn’t mean you bypass the protocol.”
For student projects that do not require an official university statement, the office generally allows interviews without formal vetting.
“If a student is doing something for class and not representing an official media outlet like The Spokesman, Bear TV, or WEAA, then they can often proceed without vetting,” said Jones. “But anything that requires an official university statement should come through us first,” said Jones.
Staff writer Tianna Jameswhite contributed to this article.
