Sex — or at least talking about it — is “in” on America’s college and university campuses. Not that it was ever out, of course.

The past several years have seen the emergence of several student-written sex columns in college student newspapers and sex-themed advice shows on student radio or TV. From The Cornell Daily Sun’s now lapsed (but I couldn’t resist the name) “Cornellingus” to the Daily Illini’s “Sex Column Answer Man” at the University of Illinois to the "Wednesday Hump" column in the Daily Nexus at University of California/Santa Barbara, sex — or at least talking about it — is “in” on America’s college and university campuses (not that it was ever out, of course).

As such columns began making their way across the country — angering/shocking more than a few folks along the way — the Student Press Law Center started receiving calls from anxious editors wondering if they’d crossed any legal boundaries by allowing their columnists to bare all with their no-holds-barred discussion of topics previously reserved for the pages of men’s’ magazines. As the years have passed, the pace of the questions has slowed, but they continue. Of course, the editorial decision to publish a column that may upset many of your readers (while entertaining/enlightening many others) will remain a tough one for some. But hopefully, this will help put most minds at ease with respect to the law.

Let’s start with an easy one: Student sex columns or advice shows are not obscene. Some readers find them vulgar or crude or offensive — pick your own adjective — but that is not the same as “obscene.” Obscenity is a legal term for expression that is not protected by the First Amendment and that can subject the publisher, and in some cases, the distributor of such material to criminal prosecution. The bar for obscenity is high and student sex columns — at least all the ones that I’ve seen to date — don’t even come close. Obscenity is, very simply stated, exceptionally “hard core” sexual speech (almost always pictorial) that has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. Student sex columns that provide frank — sometimes graphic, sometimes informative, sometimes funny — discussion of sexual issues, often in response to reader questions, simply don’t qualify as obscene, as the law currently defines the term.

Where student sex columns are not obscene or otherwise unlawful, public college officials are required to keep their hands off. They can denounce the columns. They can send out a press release to local media or letters to unhappy donors or alumni that make clear the columns do not reflect official university policy. They can submit a letter to the editor asking that the paper reconsider its decision to publish the columns. But they cannot censor the columns, punish the editors or writers or take any action that in any way penalizes student media for publishing the material. The columns are constitutionally protected at a public college or university and school administrators — government officials — are prohibited from interfering with the students’ speech simply because they find it offensive, embarrassing or an obstacle to fundraising. That is, after all, why the First Amendment exists: we don’t want government officials dictating what citizens talk about.

Administrators at a private college — where the First Amendment is not a limiting factor — probably have more leeway to restrict what is published in school-sponsored student media, though even there the authority to censor may not be unlimited. A number of private schools, for example, have enacted a student media policy or a student bill of rights protecting student speech that they may be contractually bound to honor. In other cases, a state constitution or state law may provide legal protection against censorship. Such protections will vary by school.

Just because student sex columns are not legally obscene and (at least at public colleges) are generally censor-proof does not mean that the sex columnist and editors or producers are in the clear. Columns that address the generally private, highly intimate, often sensitive topic of sex are ripe with legal danger if not handled carefully. Writing in a column, for example, that Jane (or John) Smith enjoys an unconventional sex life, suggesting that an individual has had multiple partners or even, if unmarried, that they have had sex at all can seriously harm a person’s reputation among at least some substantial segment of society. And if it turns out the charges are not true, you have probably libeled them.

Even if it turns out that the claims are true, in disclosing details about their sex lives — details that they’ve not generally shared with others and without their consent — you have likely invaded their legal right to privacy. Everyone has a legal right to a reasonable zone of privacy in his or her personal life. There are places and topics that, absent an invitation from the subject or a bona fide news interest, are simply off-limits to others, including the press. An otherwise private person’s behind-closed-doors sex life is at or near the top of that list.

Fortunately, there are two reasonably simple ways to avoid such problems.

First, as suggested above, you can obtain the subject’s consent. If you make clear to the subject who you are (a reporter/columnist) and what you are doing (gathering information for publication in a print and/or online student newspaper or broadcast on student TV or radio), college students can consent to have their otherwise private stories told. Consent is an absolute defense to both an invasion of privacy claim and — if they’ve also okayed the facts you report — a libel claim. Because stories can change and memories fade, it is safest to get the consent in writing.

Alternatively, don’t publish the subject’s name or any other information that might allow others to identify them. A person cannot successfully sue for libel or invasion of privacy unless they have been identified. While you may know you’re talking about them and they may know you’re talking about them, unless a significant number of others can also reasonably identify them, you’re safe.

Of course, if hiding or disguising a person’s identity is your plan for avoiding liability, you need to do a good job of it. In one case, for example, a student author of a sex column called us for help after she’d been threatened with a lawsuit for writing about the sexual exploits of a former boyfriend. She hadn’t used names, but she had identified him in her bylined column as “my former boyfriend” so it wasn’t too hard for many campus readers, who had known the couple when they were together, to put the pieces together about whom she was writing. Avoid names, of course, but also be mindful of using addresses, physical descriptions, relationships, job titles, activities or any other unique descriptions that would allow others to narrow down the list of possible subjects.

Finally, most student author’s of sex columns or hosts of sex advice shows have no particular medical, psychological or other expertise on the topic (other than they might fancy themselves good at it). They are simply students with a keyboard or microphone. It makes sense, then, to include a prominent disclaimer that points out to one’s audience that they are simply getting advice from another student. If they have medical or other problems that require expertise, urge them to seek out an actual expert.

Mike Hiestand is an attorney, based in the far, upper left corner of the "Lower 48," and works as a legal consultant to the Student Press Law Center.