A group of more than 25 Daily Collegian staff members published a Medium.com column Thursday publicly addressing their frustration with the student newspaper’s leadership.

The dispute centers around a newly introduced contract attempting to claim the copyright of all student-created works at the paper. The agreement would give the Collegian’s ownership “all rights, title, and interest, including copyright, to any and all content,” including photographs, videos, written work, sound recordings, and more.

The original contract also gave Collegian management the right to “reproduce, copy, sell, exhibit, publish, or distribute” staff works without limitations.

“We take issue with our content being used in a promotional way or being sold because we may not have control over how that work gets used,” the group wrote. “Not only could this lead to litigation of the student, but it will cause the student to lose out on money they could have made licensing said work.”

Issued with a two-day deadline on November 18, the contract was perceived negatively by staff members, who immediately began organizing an attempt to halt proceedings and discuss the details more.

On November 20, a “large group of staff members” sent a letter to Editor in Chief Maddie Aiken, CEO Wayne Lowman, and Board President John Dillon. The group demanded a seat at the table, the right to own created works, and the nullification of any prior contracts unknowingly signed by volunteer staffers.

According to an email from Aiken, anyone who wanted to return to the Collegian’s staff in the spring needed to sign the contract to be reevaluated before applying to staff positions. Those who didn’t sign wouldn’t be allowed to work for the paper.

A moratorium was granted by Lowman, but according to the group, no communication with leadership followed until December 15, when a new contract was issued. The reworded draft reportedly did not address any concerns advocated by students, who followed suit with another letter asking for the same demands — namely, a seat at the table.

On December 22, Aiken responded by emailing the Collegian’s staff a document with answers to frequently asked questions pertaining to the contract. However, according to staff members, the document discredited claims made in their letters and misrepresented the contract entirely.

Aiken did not publicly comment on the contract and dispute between staff members and ownership.

The updated contract required staffers to sign by December 23. Moving forward, the group of concerned Collegian staffers said it’ll continue working to negotiate the agreement before students return to campus in February.

“As we pass this date, the water has become even more muddy with texts messages from leadership telling group members they are unwilling to negotiate,” the group wrote online.

---

In a nutshell, the Collegian ownership’s attempt to seize copyright control of staffers’ work represents some of the worst parts of student media today: It’s not run by students.

One sophomore photojournalist at the Collegian, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of repercussions, felt the staff’s relationship with ownership was “pretty professional” before the copyright dispute began. But now, following controversial decisions made by people “[staff members] never see or interact with,” that could be changing.

“It’s a shame that a student organization designed to teach the newest generation of journalists has to have this kind of exploitation present,” he said.

The photojournalist added the contracts were presented to newly hired candidates before current staffers and editors were informed. He felt that the instance was particularly unfair and exploitative.

“If my coworker didn’t make any noise about it, the new candidates would’ve just signed their rights away,” he said.

Noah Riffe, a former Collegian photographer and the president of Penn State’s chapter of the National Press Photographers Association, agreed most of the blame falls on the Collegian’s ownership.

“It’s disappointing because those are the people who are supposed to protect the students, and instead of protecting them, they’re exploiting them,” Riffe said. “I will always love the Collegian, and I wouldn’t be where I am today without them, but there comes a point where you can also love something and believe that change needs to happen.”

Riffe kicked off the copyright dispute in November when he found out a small site had used one of his images without proper licensing or even notifying him. He also said he’d previously seen his photographs used on Election Day coverage by sites in states as far away as Florida and Iowa.

Riffe quickly met with Lowman to discuss the use of his photos but found the CEO wouldn’t be swayed. Frustrated, Riffe felt it was best to resign and ask the Collegian to take down his work.

“It’s really frustrating to feel like the leadership is untouchable and unreachable and unwilling to talk with students,” Riffe said. “The Collegian works to be ‘for and by the students,’ but when the people it’s supposed to serve bring up an issue, they refuse to make it heard or talk to them about it.”

Riffe felt transparency is a particularly big issue at the Collegian. He estimated half of its current staff couldn’t recall the paper’s corporate structure or didn’t know about the alumni board that calls the shots.

“The transparency is clearly lacking, and it’s sad,” Riffe added. “If it’s for and by the students, the students should understand and have a say in what’s going on. At the end of the day, it’s their paper.”

Currently, Riffe remains away from the Collegian and is headed to the Centre Daily Times as an intern this spring. He said he’s currently using his connections with the NPPA to help provide legal support and counsel to the Collegian’s staff.

Twenty-seven Collegian staffers signed the most recent letter to ownership on December 19. Just one editor publicly supported it. Riffe feels this isn’t a coincidence given the tough position they’re in.

“They want what’s best for the staff, but they’re also thrown into this position where they want to keep their jobs,” Riffe said. “A lot of them are really close to the top leadership and feel a responsibility to stand by the organization.”

Erin Hogge, the Collegian’s fall semester news editor, broke away from the editorial staff by signing the letter. She felt her status as a leader at the paper could help the staff receive a boost in contract negotiations.

“While I can’t and won’t speak for others, I felt that the argument against the contract had enough merit for me to sign the opposition letter, and as an editor, signing the letter might grab the attention of leadership,” Hogge said.

---

At the end of the day, student media exists to support prospective journalists, help them learn, and give them opportunities to thrive in the industry. Predatory agreements seeking to take rights away from students only get in the way of providing them with valuable first-hand experience and take advantage of them in the process.

In fact, the Collegian’s own mission statement says it seeks to “publish quality media products for the Penn State community” and provide “a rewarding educational experience for student staff members.” What’s the lesson here, then? “Sign our take-it-or-leave-it agreement or else”? That’s completely unprofessional.

Contracts like these don’t help the next generation of journalists, many of whom volunteer at student media outlets and work for free. That work is hard, and, amid the coronavirus pandemic, often comes with risk. Additional stresses about copyright agreements and liability only add insult to injury for student staffers.

Onward State and the Daily Collegian disagree about many things. But at our core, we’re all just student journalists trying to make it. It’s clear hostile contracts and exploitative agreements have no place in student media, and they shouldn’t be tolerated no matter where you’re working.