The UNC-CH Media Law Society, in collaboration with The Center for Media Law and Policy, hosted an event on Wednesday titled “The Two-Way Mirror: Transparency on the UNC Campus.” The panel, which explored the University’s practices of releasing and withholding information, marked the 17th consecutive year the Center has held a First Amendment Day event, with one year missed due to COVID-19.
Will Christensen, President of the Media Law Society and a second-year law student at UNC School of Law, moderated the discussion. He highlighted the event’s relevance in examining what information the University chooses to share or withhold. The panel featured Ashley Fox, an associate attorney at Stevens Martin Vaughn & Tadych PLLC, and Brianna Atkinson, a higher education reporter at WUNC, both UNC graduates.
Fox discussed her role on the legal team representing media organizations, including The News & Observer and The Daily Tar Heel, in a lawsuit. This lawsuit sought the release of an independent review of the School of Civic Life and Leadership under the N.C. Public Records Act. The school had faced controversy over its hiring practices.
The University hired K&L Gates LLP in the summer of 2025 to conduct an independent review. After the report was completed, the University declined to release it, citing concerns about exposing state-protected confidential information. Christensen questioned the feasibility of processing thousands of public record requests annually while maintaining transparency.
“Almost everything we do is in some kind of electronic communication,” Fox stated. “I think agencies and institutions really just have to set aside the resources to get through them.” She emphasized that the University must prioritize releasing information, adding, “I mean, the public has a right to the information. It’s technically the public’s documents. It’s not an excuse to just say we don’t have the capacity to do it.”
Public Syllabus Policy Sparks Concern
The panel also addressed the new UNC System policy requiring public access to all syllabuses. This policy emerged after pressure from The Oversight Project, an organization linked to The Heritage Foundation. The University defines a syllabus as containing basic course information, objectives, assessment weighting, grading scale, attendance policy, required materials, and a statement on diverse scholarly perspectives.
Atkinson reported hearing concerns from professors regarding this policy. She noted that the information sought might not be out of curiosity but for potential targeting. Christopher Petsko, a UNC business professor, was among those whose records were requested. Atkinson shared that Petsko had faced backlash, including hate comments and online harassment, after The Oversight Project found and posted his syllabus online when he initially refused to release it.
“It was targeting him. It was targeting him personally. It was targeting his partner, and it became overwhelming for him,” Atkinson said. Christensen inquired about a potential “chilling effect” on professors’ free speech due to the public syllabus policy. Atkinson confirmed this chilling effect is already occurring.
“They’re concerned about what they say on social media,” Atkinson explained. “They’re concerned if they go to a protest, how people will take it, so people are carving back what they are doing, how they are engaging, what they are talking about in society as an individual.”
Following the panel, audience members engaged in a discussion. One attendee asked about the long-term prospects of First Amendment legal battles and the possibility of a broader shift toward transparency. “You know, it kind of ebbs and flows back and forth,” Fox responded. “You have periods that are better for transparency and periods that are worse for transparency, just like any other issue out there. It’s a good hope [that] over time it trends toward transparency.”
