This article is great journalism because it tells the truth about a situation as best it could. It would appear that Jerry Falwell is a cross between a Pharisee from Biblical times and a Nazi from Germany during World War II. The Pharisees were more concerned about their reputation then they were about truth. The Nazi’s did an outstanding job of creating propaganda through 100% control of news media and content. 

The older I get, the angrier I get at authoritarians like Jerry Falwell who grew up under the thumb of a father who never confessed the sin of pride, and had plenty of “whitewashed tombs” in his backyard. Power and lording over these students will only teach them never to trust those in a position of authority over them. You’ve neutered their creativity and zeal for life, all before the age of 22. 

Shame on you, Mr. Falwell, and shame on you, “Liberty” University!

Educational institutions are about educating students? Where have you been the last 20 years? Universities in the US, both public and private, have become businesses. This is clear in this case from Liberty U’s actions and the words of its administrators. It is also clear that the “Champion “ is really just a public relations tool. And , being the owners of said paper, the University  has every right to use it that way, if they choose. Nevertheless, it is a sad time for our country when institutions misrepresent, whether intentionally or not, their true purpose. 

And for the commentator suggesting a parallel to Nazis: keep your ignorant opinions to yourself. The fact that you don’t like someone does not make them a Nazi. You either have no idea how evil Nazism is and what they did, or you are deliberately playing the leftist libel and slander game. There is nothing going on in this country today that is anything close to what Nazis did in Germany. 

Why hasn’t World run positive articles about the Red-letter Christian movement? Maybe because it is heresy?

Freedom of the Press means the press is being free from slavery to the Government AND free from the tyranny of an individual’s opinion. The press is free to determine what they print, irrespective of an individual’s desire to print something.

If World had a staffer who wanted to run an article about the positive economic impacts of abortion, would you let them?

If World had an editor who wanted to publish a story about the devastation felt by a woman who wants to become a man but the government healthcare refuses to store her eggs, would you publish that?

No, I don't think so. World, like any other press, has every right to determine what to publish and how to tailor its publication for its audience. This includes the right to determine who to hire to begin with. World doesn’t just let anyone publish anything on their mind!

Panyard has every right to start a blog or join another organization that fits his liberal values. But he has no right to force his views upon the press – in this case, the University itself. He has no right to highjack their audience for his purposes.

I am disappointed in World and you specifically Martin for running a hit piece against Liberty University and its staff. You accuse them of tyranny! That’s a pretty tall accusation. Please consider the implications of this article and read James 4:11: “Do not speak evil against one another, brothers”.

As one who has watched Catholic universities morph into unbibilical enclaves, I applaud the leadership at Liberty University for sticking to their principles.  A school newspaper should celebrate the university's achievements and inform students about events and activities.  Many of us Christians are desperate for a sanctuary for our students where they can celebrate the joys of being in the midst of fellow Christians.  If a student doesn't like the polcies of a specific Christian school, he or she can attend hundreds of other schools that share his or her worldview; so few remain that are havens for those who wish to be immersed in a Christian-friendly college.  This reminds me of people who wish to change a specific denomination to fit their ideal rather than join a denomination that already represents it.  LIberty means the ability to choose one's path.  The university is aptly named.

It is essentially Jerry Falwell, Jr.'s university and he can run it how he wants. And people can--and probably should--stay away in droves if they see red flags with how it is run. His tight-grip control over the school newspaper will undoubtedly be a red flag to many.

I disagree a little, though, with the comment above about the campus newspaper that read "A school newspaper should celebrate the university's achievements and inform students about events and activities." Um, no, that might be the job of the school's public relations office, but shouldn't really be the job of the school newspaper. That would make the PR office and the school newspaper essentially redundant and, worse, would teach the students nothing about journalism. That Falwell has, in effect, made it so at Liberty tells us something important about Liberty. 

I'm certain that balancing the rights and responsibilities of a student newspaper is always a difficult thing, but to the extent that the article above is accurate, Falwell is way too sensitive about what gets published in the school newspaper. If you're thinking about attending Liberty, that's one fact you should know in advance.

I certainly wouldn't attend a church where any dissenting voices are handled in similar fashion.

Interesting the first thing that pops up when I logged in to comment was: "Note: Your comment may be delayed and require action by the moderator if our filters detect possible objectionable content."  So World can filter our comments but Liberty University is slammed for filtering its OWN publication?  I am not that familiar with Liberty but I can perceive a one-sided article when I read it.  Has anyone interviewed the other side involved in this horrible injustice?  It's natural for college kids to push the limits, but it's incumbent on Christian institutions and authority figures (parents, pastors, etc.) to have those limits.  If the adults in the room don't hold the line we all lose and the gospel is compromised.  I don't doubt there are problems at Liberty and those should be called out in the proper forum.  But to be told that because there are limits on a school newspaper editorial staff the institution is practicing Journalistic Slavery?  Ridiculous.

“[W]e’re not a...public relations organ.”  I interpreted Jerry Falwell Jr.’s and Bruce Kirk’s statements/sentiments to suggest that they wanted the school newspaper to function as a “public relations organ.”  Shame on me for not condemning them and calling for their public humiliation and excoriation, but I just don’t see the scandal here.

It would give me pause if the administration exhorted journalism students and graduates to go out into the world AFTER they left Liberty and ignore their journalistic responsibilities so they could continuously sing the praises of Liberty University.  However, I think this is completely different.  Perhaps I’m just too crass or scandal-fatigued to be alarmed, but it seems like the administration wants the paper to serve as a marketing tool for the university.  

Perhaps this could have been avoided by making it clear from the beginning that the primary purpose of the paper was to market the university.  Would that be wrong?  Don’t universities have marketing departments? [Note: I am not an academic, nor am I a journalist, nor am I affiliated in any way with Liberty University and I’m not an alumnus of the school.]

As someone who does not have a dog in this fight, I think this story was unnecessarily alarmist.  To quote Phillip Johnson, “[Certain groups of people] love to see themselves as embattled dissenters.”  I guess that’s just more sexy than doing the boring, arduous work of promoting the institution with which they have voluntarily chosen to associate themselves.  

Here’s a suggestion for these students: go off campus and start your own paper.  Be leaders instead of whiners, be entrepreneurs instead of victims.  

What bothers me the most about this is the firing of the students. A firing by any other name is still a firing. How this situation was handled along with the implications of losing scholarships and other fallout, intended or not, concerns me a lot. It seems, though I’m not sure of all of the “facts” presented, that this could have been handled better.

I do know a bit about the university and was recently there and have been many times over the last few years. There is much to wonder about and of concern. And yet there is also a lot to be excited about and some great graduates going into the world with a desire to honor Jesus in what they do.  

Having attended a Christian college that had been a Bible institute and then in time lost much of its Christian perspective and influence reminds me of the challenges of the balancing act of being a liberal arts college in this world. How do you do it and retain Christian core values and belief? It is a tightrope walk to be sure. One can only hope that LU can stay on the rope and not fall into the abyss as my college did and had to close its doors.

I also must add that World has a penchant for taking the side of people over institutions and organizations. So I’m not completely convinced of the balance and perspective presented here. I’ve seen editorial bias and misrepresentation before so will not accept this as the final word.

This article helpfully reports (pending a possible response from aministration) that the apparently ham-handed newspaper revamp raises questions about the kind of education LU intends to offer. Nonetheless, I hold that that the proffered alternative premise, that the absence of slavery constitutes freedom, is not a biblical proposition. The British national anthem notwithstanding, all men are slaves to the set of principles, the entities, persons, or beings to whom they ascribe the highest authority. (See Psalm 115, especially verses 8 and 18. Also, the Apostle Paul advertises himself as the slave of Christ.) The question is not, therefore, whether we are slaves, but which slavery will conduce genuine freedom. In the public high school where I labor, the spirit of teaching in all subjects (other than STEM) encourages the students to express their (generally uninformed) opinions, which are deemed good by the mere fact that the individual student holds them. As a result, most of our graduates are woefully weak in rhetoric, logic, and even reading comprehension. On a larger scale, the modern insistence on the right of absolute uncensored journalism has resulted in a field dismayingly unmoored to civil discourse. The student who aspires to a career in journalism must learn how to disagree respectfully with others, even with his own publisher. This means -- this requires -- authoritative intervention from faculty, and, yes, even from admin. The respectful expression of thoughtful opinion is a flower that must be carefully cultivated, for it does not bloom naturally.  Granted, admin's exercising comprehensive authority over publication does not stimulate this invaluable skill; but, then, neither does comprehensive student authority.

I am glad to note that Mr. Olasky's addendum, "Against Journalistic Slavery," softens the article's apparent premise in the direction I advocate herein.

I think the efforts to get more control the campus newspaper are fine. But Mr. Falwell and the administration went about it in a very unchristian way.  The school has achieved amazing growth and I expect they have goals for more. But they face challenges with a generally falling student population. From 2011 to 2016 the population of 18 to 24 years olds shrank from 31.1 to 30.8 million. The student population shrank from 21.0 to 20.2 million over the same period.  The Liberty “On Campus” student population grew from 7,066 to 8,105 in that same time period. So Liberty has been growing in light of a shrinking population of available students.  Mr. Falwell is apparently very concerned about any bad press.  But thanks to the reporters at WORLD Magazine, Liberty is being held accountable, at lease to some degree, for abusing the students who were on the newspaper staff.

There is a disconnect in what the students thought they were being hired to do.  Falwell Jr. is not doing anything illegal or unethical as far as the purpose of the publication is concerned.  Firing two people and disguising it as restructuring was not Christ-like though.  

There are several comments that think this is about free speech.  The paper has a purpose per Falwell Jr. it was "established to champion the interests of the university, disseminate information about happenings on Liberty’s campus, as well as the positive impacts of Liberty in the community and beyond. And as such, the publisher of the publication, which is the university, is responsible for content decisions, to find stories to be covered by Championpersonnel and makes all of the calls on the articles, photographs and other content."  

I am not sure why they would have any articles on Trump in the publication based on that statement.  

We don't have enough details about the Facebook posting of the article on Trump that was not allowed into the publication.  The student being told to not do it again or there would be consequences, may be because of how the post was presented.  We need more information before making a judgment there.  

I would rather have seen an article on our foreign policy and corporate partnerships with Saudi Arabi are putting soldiers, sailors, and airmen in harms way in Yemen, Libya, and Syria.  LU has a school newspaper that is really a marketing publication.  They just need to fix their job descriptions for the students and clearly define the boundaries for what can go into the publication.