Universities often describe themselves as bastions of knowledge, critical thinking, and democratic discourse. Yet when student journalists attempt to exercise those very principles, they sometimes find themselves facing the same forces of censorship and suppression that journalism seeks to challenge. The recent controversy involving PRIMUM, the official student publication of the University of Mindanao (UM), is a troubling reminder that press freedom is not only threatened in national newsrooms—it can also be stifled within the walls of academic institutions.
Reports that members of PRIMUM’s editorial board resigned after the university allegedly imposed restrictions on their coverage—and later removed the publication’s official Facebook page—have sparked widespread concern among campus journalists across the Davao Region and beyond. At the heart of the issue is a question that goes far beyond one publication: Can a university that claims to nurture critical thinking also dictate what student journalists are allowed to write?
When “Apolitical” Becomes a Tool for Silence
According to accounts from PRIMUM’s staff, the administration instructed the editorial team to avoid politically inclined content because the university considers itself “apolitical.” The directive reportedly limited the publication to covering internal university activities such as events, announcements, and institutional achievements.
On the surface, the idea of remaining “apolitical” might appear harmless, even neutral. But in practice, it can become a convenient justification for silencing legitimate discussions about society, governance, and history—topics that inevitably intersect with politics.
Student journalism, by its very nature, is not meant to function as a public relations arm of the university. Its purpose is to inform the student body, scrutinize issues that affect the academic community, and encourage critical dialogue. Restricting coverage to sanitized institutional updates strips campus publications of their most important role: holding power to account, even within the university itself.
The PRIMUM staff reportedly faced a stark choice—continue operating under strict limitations or stop altogether. Several editors chose to resign rather than compromise what they believed to be the core principles of journalism: independence, accountability, and truth.
Their decision reflects a painful reality that many campus journalists know too well: sometimes defending press freedom means walking away from positions that no longer allow it to exist.
History Is Not “Political Propaganda”
The tensions reportedly escalated after PRIMUM published posts discussing historical and political issues, including the EDSA People Power Revolution, reflections on Martial Law, and commentary on the policies of former President Rodrigo Duterte.
These topics are not fringe political activism. They are part of Philippine history and contemporary political discourse—subjects routinely discussed in classrooms, academic conferences, and public forums.
To label such discussions as inappropriate for student journalists risks reducing universities into spaces where only safe narratives are allowed to exist. When institutions discourage students from engaging with history and politics, they also discourage them from understanding the very forces shaping the nation they live in.
If universities cannot tolerate critical reflection on national issues, where else should young Filipinos learn to debate them responsibly?
The Deletion of a Platform
The situation became even more alarming when PRIMUM’s official Facebook page—its primary platform for reaching readers—was reportedly removed following the mass resignation of its editorial team.
For a campus publication in the digital age, social media is not merely a communication tool; it is the modern equivalent of a printing press. Removing it effectively silences the publication and erases its connection to the community it serves.
The deletion quickly drew condemnation from several campus publications and student journalism groups, including the UP Mindanao Communicators’ Guild, The Collegiate Headlight of the University of Southeastern Philippines, and The Central Post of Central Mindanao University.
These groups warned that the incident could represent a serious threat to campus press freedom and called for the restoration of PRIMUM’s platform.
Their concerns are not without legal basis.
The Law That Protects Campus Journalism
Republic Act No. 7079, also known as the Campus Journalism Act of 1991, was enacted precisely to prevent situations like this. The law guarantees editorial independence and protects campus publications from administrative interference.
Its purpose is clear: student journalists must be able to determine their editorial policies without external control, allowing them to develop critical thinking and professional journalistic skills.
Attempts to dictate what topics may or may not be covered—or actions that remove platforms used by campus publications—raise serious questions about whether these protections are being respected.
More importantly, they challenge the broader commitment of educational institutions to democratic values.
Why Campus Journalism Matters
Campus publications are not merely extracurricular activities. They are training grounds for future journalists, writers, scholars, and civic leaders.
Within these spaces, students learn how to question authority, verify information, present different viewpoints, and engage in responsible public discourse. These are not only journalistic skills—they are democratic ones.
When student journalists are discouraged from asking difficult questions or discussing controversial issues, the message sent is clear: critical thinking has limits.
And once those limits are imposed, academic freedom begins to erode.
A Call for Transparency and Accountability
As of this writing, the University of Mindanao has yet to release an official statement addressing the allegations surrounding the restrictions on PRIMUM and the removal of its Facebook page.
Silence from institutions in moments like this often deepens public concern rather than calming it. Transparency is essential not only to clarify what truly happened but also to reaffirm the university’s commitment to academic freedom.
Restoring PRIMUM’s platform and allowing student journalists to operate independently would be a meaningful step toward rebuilding trust.
The Larger Lesson
The PRIMUM controversy should not be viewed as an isolated dispute between a university administration and a student publication. Instead, it serves as a reflection of a larger national question: How much space does the Philippines truly allow for dissenting voices—even in institutions meant to nurture them?
Student journalists are often among the first to confront issues of censorship because they operate in environments where authority and hierarchy are deeply entrenched. Yet their courage in defending the truth should be recognized, not punished.
As one of PRIMUM’s editors wrote in response to the attempts to silence them:
“Silence will not keep the truth hidden.”
Indeed, history shows that the suppression of voices rarely succeeds in erasing the issues they raise. If anything, it amplifies them.
For universities that claim to produce critical thinkers, the lesson should be simple: the pursuit of truth must never be treated as a threat.
Instead, it should be protected—especially within the institutions that claim to teach it.