In different context, the school could have brought this PR-focused individual on staff the right way. Having a master's in journalism myself, I have much fait

In different context, the school could have brought this PR-focused individual on staff the right way. Having a master's in journalism myself, I have much faith in the value of pure journalism, but also little faith in the idea of pure journalism being inherently sustainable (financially). To kick an experienced, passionate journalist off the paper staff is ludicrous, and so is the idea of censoring the paper to show the school only in a positive light. However, a PR/consulting professional could provide much value to a group of young students who are pursuing an industry that will likely be quite harsh to them. Understanding how ads work, learning how to build a personal brand and learning about other industries that seek similar skills to those of a journalist are three things that come to mind. Many working journalists and journalism professors I've encountered have a highly negative view of PR – calling it the "dark side." Many of them entered a job market years ago where it was far more feasible to get a job at a newspaper and climb to larger and larger papers until you have a solid career – today the more likely path is one of repeated layoffs, shutdowns and underpaid contract work. In my mind, these two professors could run this paper as a team very effectively. The business-minded PR professional could help the paper work toward financial independence and help students better understand the current career landscape, while the OP could teach pure journalism and stand up every time the former individual tries to cut out an article that reflects poorly on the university.