Skip to main content

Student Journalism Ethics

How to apply the NUJ Code of Conduct and IPSO Editors' Code to your student work: source protection on campus, off-the-record agreements, AI disclosure, identifying student subjects, and the legal risks facing university publications.

Last reviewed: Next review due:

Why journalism ethics applies from day one

Student journalists sometimes assume that ethical standards are a professional concern for when they enter the industry. That assumption is wrong. The moment you publish a story in a student newspaper, on a student website, or on your own journalism blog, you are subject to the same defamation, privacy, and accuracy obligations as any professional outlet in the UK.

The two frameworks that govern UK journalism ethics are the NUJ Code of Conduct, which applies to members of the National Union of Journalists (including student members), and the IPSO Editors' Code of Practice, which applies to publications regulated by the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Most student publications are not formally IPSO-regulated, but the Editors' Code is used as the benchmark against which student journalism is assessed by educators, employers, and the industry.

Understanding these frameworks now protects you, your sources, and the people you write about — and marks you out to editors as a journalist who can be trusted with sensitive material.

The NUJ Code and IPSO Editors' Code: what student journalists need to know

The two codes overlap significantly but have different emphases. The NUJ Code focuses on individual journalists; the IPSO Editors' Code governs publications. Together they define the ethical landscape for UK journalism.

Accuracy (NUJ / IPSO Clause 1)

Every published fact must be verified. Do not publish a claim on the basis of a single source unless corroboration is impossible and the story is in the public interest. Inaccuracies must be corrected promptly and with due prominence. This applies equally to a student newspaper article as to a national daily.

Privacy (IPSO Clause 3)

Everyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in certain contexts. On campus this includes medical information, personal relationships, and any communications made in a context where privacy would be expected. Intrusion is only justified by genuine public interest, not public curiosity.

Harassment (IPSO Clause 4)

Journalists must not persist in pursuing an individual after being asked to stop. In a campus setting, where repeated contact is easy, this clause has real practical force. One contact for comment is appropriate; repeated attempts after a refusal risk breaching Clause 4.

Source protection (NUJ Code / IPSO Clause 14)

Journalists must protect the identity of confidential sources. This principle cannot be overridden by a university authority, a student union, or social pressure from peers. If you have promised a source confidentiality, you must maintain it.

Children (IPSO Clause 6)

Do not interview or photograph anyone under the age of 16 without parental or guardian consent. In the context of student journalism at a university, this is less commonly relevant, but sixth-form-linked publications, outreach events, and sports coverage that involves minors can bring it into play.

Discrimination (IPSO Clause 12)

Do not make reference to someone's race, colour, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or other protected characteristic unless it is genuinely relevant to the story. Campus journalism that touches on EDI issues must apply this clause carefully.

Source protection on campus

Source protection is one of the most important ethical obligations in journalism, and it takes on a specific character on a university campus. Sources who speak to student journalists are often fellow students, academic staff, or administrators who have limited experience of how journalism works and may not fully understand the protections they are entitled to.

  • 1Make it explicit at the start of any interview whether the conversation is on the record, on background, or off the record. Do not assume a source understands these terms without explanation.
  • 2If a source asks to remain anonymous, take that request seriously. Consider whether the information can be published without attribution, or whether you need to find a corroborating on-the-record source.
  • 3Store notes, recordings, and communications identifying a source separately from your published materials. If you use a university email account, be aware that university IT policies may give administrators access to your communications.
  • 4If a university authority, student union, or other body asks you to reveal a confidential source, do not comply without legal advice. Contact the NUJ Legal Defence Fund or the Student Publication Association for guidance.
  • 5Understand that source protection obligations survive the end of the story. A promise of confidentiality does not expire when the piece is published.

Off-the-record briefings: rules and risks

The term “off the record” is frequently misunderstood by both journalists and sources. In UK practice, off the record means the information cannot be published in a form that attributes it to the source or identifies them, even obliquely. The information can, however, be used to inform further reporting or to seek corroboration from other sources.

The agreement must be made before the information is given. A source cannot give information on the record and then retroactively request off-the-record status, though professional courtesy often leads journalists to accommodate this in practice.

  • Agree the ground rules explicitly before an interview begins, not after.
  • If a source switches from on the record to off the record mid-conversation, note the switch clearly and confirm it with the source.
  • Do not breach an off-the-record agreement even if another journalist publishes the same information from a different source.
  • Be wary of sources who routinely seek off-the-record status for information that is not genuinely sensitive: this can be a technique to frustrate legitimate reporting.
  • Consider whether the off-the-record information is necessary for the story or whether a corroborated on-the-record version would serve equally well.

AI disclosure in student journalism

AI writing and research tools are widely used in student work, and their use in journalism raises specific ethical questions that the industry is still working through. No UK regulator currently imposes a mandatory disclosure requirement for AI use in published journalism, but accuracy obligations make verification of AI-generated content essential.

The core risk of AI tools in journalism is hallucination: the generation of plausible-sounding but factually incorrect information. A quote attributed to a real person, a statistic with a plausible-looking source, or a chronology of events can all be fabricated by AI tools with no warning signal. Every AI-generated passage used in a published piece must be independently verified against primary sources before publication.

Practical AI disclosure guidelines for student journalists

  • If AI tools were used to research, draft, or summarise content that appears in a published piece, disclose this in an editorial note or author note.
  • Never publish AI-generated quotes attributed to real people without verifying the quote against a primary source.
  • Do not use AI-generated images in editorial contexts without clear labelling as AI-generated, in line with IPSO guidance on image manipulation.
  • Check your publication’s editorial policy on AI before using AI tools in your workflow. Many journalism programmes now have explicit AI use policies.
  • The Index on Censorship and the NUJ both publish guidance on AI and journalism that is worth reading as the regulatory landscape develops.

Defamation and legal risks for university publications

Student publications are subject to the Defamation Act 2013. A defamation claim requires the claimant to show that the publication made a false statement of fact, that it referred to them, that it was published to a third party, and that it caused or was likely to cause serious harm to their reputation. The threshold of “serious harm” introduced by the 2013 Act was designed to deter trivial claims, but student publications have faced and settled defamation claims.

Academic staff are a particular area of risk. A story that alleges research misconduct, sexual harassment, or financial impropriety against a named academic must be grounded in solid evidence and ideally reviewed by a media law adviser before publication. Societies and student organisations can also be defamed, and student union officials have sought legal advice following critical student press coverage.

  • Always give the subject of a critical story a reasonable opportunity to comment before publication, and publish their response or note their refusal to comment.
  • The three main defences are truth, honest opinion, and public interest publication. Know which defence you are relying on before publishing any potentially defamatory content.
  • Honest opinion requires that the statement is recognisable as opinion, that it is based on facts that are stated or clearly indicated, and that a person could honestly hold that opinion on those facts.
  • The public interest defence under section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 requires that you reasonably believed publication was in the public interest and that you complied with responsible journalism standards in gathering and verifying the story.
  • Seek support from the Student Publication Association or the NUJ if you receive a legal threat or pre-publication legal letter from a university or its solicitors.

Frequently asked questions

Does the NUJ Code of Conduct apply to student journalists?
The NUJ Code of Conduct applies to NUJ members, which includes student members who join via the NUJ student membership scheme. Even if a student journalist is not yet an NUJ member, the Code is widely regarded as the ethical baseline for all journalism in the UK. Student publications and journalism programmes routinely use it as a teaching standard. Editors at regional and national outlets will expect graduates to be familiar with its principles from day one.
What does "off the record" actually mean in student journalism?
Off the record means the information can inform your reporting but cannot be attributed to the source by name or in a way that identifies them. It is an agreement between journalist and source made before the information is given. If a source says something and then asks for it to be off the record afterwards, the journalist is not bound by the retroactive request — though professional practice is often to honour it if circumstances allow. The terms "background", "not for attribution", and "on lobby terms" have specific meanings in political journalism and should not be used interchangeably with "off the record".
Can a student newspaper be sued for defamation?
Yes. Student publications face the same defamation law as professional outlets under the Defamation Act 2013. A claimant must show the publication made a false statement of fact that caused or was likely to cause serious harm to their reputation. The main defences are truth (the statement is substantially true), honest opinion (clearly flagged comment), and publication on a matter of public interest. Academic staff, student union officers, and societies have all pursued or threatened defamation claims against student publications. Every student editor should understand these defences before publishing anything that could harm someone’s reputation.
Do I have to disclose if I used AI in my student journalism?
No single regulatory body has yet issued a binding disclosure rule for AI use in journalism, but the NUJ and IPSO both emphasise accuracy as a non-negotiable requirement. If AI tools were used to draft, summarise, or generate content that appears in a published piece, disclosure is becoming standard practice in professional newsrooms and an increasing expectation at journalism programmes. The key risk is that AI tools can produce plausible-sounding but factually incorrect text: every AI-assisted passage must be independently verified before publication.
How do I protect a source who is a fellow student or university employee?
Source protection is a core principle of both the NUJ Code and the IPSO Editors’ Code (Clause 14). If you have agreed to protect a source’s identity, you must not reveal it even if pressured by a university authority, a student union, or another party. Keep notes and communications identifying the source separate from your published materials. If you are placed under formal legal pressure to reveal a source, seek advice from the NUJ Legal Defence Fund or a media law solicitor before complying with any request.
What are the rules around identifying student subjects in news stories?
IPSO’s Editors’ Code Clause 6 applies to anyone under 16 — do not identify minors without parental consent. For adult students, identification is generally lawful but must be accurate and not misleading. Where a story could result in harassment or serious harm to a named student, Clause 3 (privacy) and Clause 4 (harassment) should be considered. The public interest in naming a student must be weighed against any likely harm. If in doubt, seek advice from the Student Publication Association or the NUJ.

Related guides

StudentStudent Press FreedomRead →StudentRunning a Student NewspaperRead →StudentNCTJ Fast-Track GuideRead →StudentTransitioning from Student to StaffRead →BlogHow to Become a Journalist in the UKRead →BlogFreelance Journalism: Getting StartedRead →

Primary sources