Dear President Pamela Gann,

Claremont McKenna College recently instituted a new student media policy requiring student journalists interested in contacting administrators to do so strictly through the Office of Public Affairs. The OPA may then facilitate an interview for the student, but can choose instead to provide the requested information or a statement on the given issue, which denies the reporter the opportunity to speak directly to administrators who are most familiar with each topic.

We urge you to reconsider this policy because it undermines our ability to provide timely coverage of the issues that students care about. In hindering student journalists’ access to CMC administrators, this approach to student media decreases the transparency of administrative actions and harms the relationship between the CMC administration and the students whom it is meant to serve.

Max Benavidez, Associate Vice President for Public Affairs, and Alissa Stedman, Director of Media Relations, outlined and discussed this policy in a February 4th meeting with editors from the Forum, Claremont Independent, and Claremont Port Side. They said that this policy is meant to put student journalists in contact with appropriate sources and to provide them with accurate information. External news media already operate this way, making this new policy a formalization of such practice for all media.

This policy makes sense for external media, and we appreciate the respect implied by treating our publications the same way. Yet campus publications should be treated differently. Unlike external media, we are familiar with CMC and its staff, and we care about stories that will never be national news. And in our attempts to adhere to the new policy by contacting administrators through the OPA, we have found OPA staff to be slow in responding to our requests – if they respond at all. We have missed deadlines because of this policy, preventing us from keeping students informed about the issues that affect them.

We understand the administration’s desire to ensure that information published about CMC is consistent and accurate, particularly in the wake of the SAT scandal. Yet the SAT scandal demonstrated the need for more accountability, not less. Student media provide necessary external oversight by informing CMC students and the Claremont community about what is happening at CMC. Yet to do so, they must have access to administrators who are free to speak openly and candidly. The interactions between our writers and CMC administrators should not be mediated by an office explicitly devoted to public relations.

CMC prides itself on its close-knit community, and rightfully so. Yet when it comes to fostering an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect, this policy is a step in the wrong direction. Trust administrators to accurately represent CMC and its policies, and to carefully explain their own perspectives on a given issue. And trust our publications to ethically communicate those perspectives to a community of students that deserves access to information about CMC’s policies and the people who shape them.





View the signed copy of the letter.


  1. I couldn’t agree more. There should be more cross-publication collaboration in the future; hopefully things get changed

  2. CMC Administration Fail. Maybe a good policy for a school of 20,000+ but a terrible policy for a small liberal arts college that prides itself on creating an intimate community that grants students access to administrators.

  3. I don’t know if there is a larger red flag regarding a new policy than a JOINT response from the Forum, CI, Port Side, AND The Student Life. I honestly can’t think of the last time they unanimously agreed on anything.

    The CMC Administration clearly needs to make some serious adjustments.


Comments are closed.