University Record - 2nd Edition

Boston

meh, it became apparent that all they wanted was to censor the rag.

The rag should be this, this and this, like.

Crash

actually I read it as more like it shouldn't be this, this and this.

as an aside, the attitude from a few people involved seemed to be "well, we won. its fine." - simple fact is its a very close motion, and doesn't bode well for a future situation.

Boston

&#231 wrote: »

actually I read it as more like it shouldn't be this, this and this.

as an aside, the attitude from a few people involved seemed to be "well, we won. its fine." - simple fact is its a very close motion, and doesn't bode well for a future situation.

Either way thats the editiors decision, he was elected, not the bunch of blow hearts that stood up and talked ****e.

Crash

Its the editors decisions but the editor can be censured, mandated, impeached etc. and as such its therefore the SU as a whole's decision in the long run.

Boston

&#231 wrote: »

Its the editors decisions but the editor can be censured, mandated, impeached etc. and as such its therefore the SU as a whole's decision in the long run.

I've more faith in an elected position, then a positions which can be given out on the flip of a coin. He puts in all the work, why should the SU have a say? Why should he have to vet his work?

That motion was a pure example of trying to do the right things for the wrong reasons, and thats why it collapsed. FFs one of the last speakers tried to make out he was doing it for the homosexuals.

Andrew 83

LiouVille wrote:

I've more faith in an elected position, then a positions which can be given out on the flip of a coin. He puts in all the work, why should the SU have a say? Why should he have to vet his work?

Because it's the SU's paper. If people don't want the members of the SU to have a say in the running of the organisation's paper they should move to make the paper independent.

(Also I don't think broad elections of such a big electorate are always the best method of selecting a candidate. Interviews by those who know what a job entails in depth and can judge the merits of potential candidates on that basis can also be a good way of appointment depending on the job.)

Andrew 83

Andrew 83 wrote:

they should move to make the paper independent.

Which is what I'd personally like to see happen.

Boston

Hey donal I'll propose the motions if you'll find someoen to second it.

Andrew 83

I'm not really inclined to have a strong view either way on this, I think there is some sort of wording in the constitution which already states some sort of minimal independence, but how much independence are you looking for? If the Deputy President remains as both the union's Publicity Officer and the editor, then in the absence of there being another publication (I know Simon has spken of doing this but haven't seen one yet), how is this going to work? Is it just a matter of everything staying teh same but the editor being above any criticism from Council etc?

LiouVille

LiouVille wrote:

Hey donal I'll propose the motions if you'll find someoen to second it.

To be honest I posted my comment in such a way that I wish not to do anything about it at all. I'll bring something forward if I'm totally behind it, but I've been quite involved in the SU before and don't wish to take an active role in it anymore.

Cheers though.

Oh and Andrew I think it's the news team who are independent and can criticise away if needs be, but it wouldn't normally happen.

CmcC

Liouville, I don't think we were a bunch of blow hearts that stood up and talked ****e.

What is the problem with students critising the content of the SU paper?

Im amazed at the attitude of people to this and it is so typical of irish people. The criticism was directed at the professional job Simon was doing, not at Simon personally. We pay the wages and operational costs of the SU and we can expect a certain standard from what we pay for. We would like to see a littel news directly about student affairs. While the paper may be self funding now, it wasn't in the past and certain ads can be questioned, as can the content as is our right. Simon is a lovely guy, doing a great job but we can push through council for changes and an official madate for the union to concentrate on student issues in its paper.

The motion was expected to garner as much as 10-20 votes, the fact that it recieved so many, 49-56 shows how people are actually annoyed baout this, coupled with the fact that Council very rarely goes against the sabbats and that Exec members had been strongly discouraged from speaking on it and couldn't vote for it.

Look, running and winning doesn't make you immune from crit.

And what the hell is this about
"FFs one of the last speakers tried to make out he was doing it for the homosexuals." Im not in FF, and i was pointing out that the Radical Mike sex column is pretty tasteless in the official SU paper. There is a piranha and a place for that sort of writing.
For example: "Not being a gay myself I can't be sure of whether it is possible to be cured. I can tell you that ten percent of the population is afflicted with this" Is this meant to be funny? Is this what a SU paper is for.

The SU has a say cos it pays his wages. Simon is a nice guy, but since when is it wrong to critise a certain aspect of his job. His Freshers guide, posters, publicity etc are all great. But spare me if I want to say something negative.

It s the sickening platitudes that bug me and the fact that people aré always prepared to put frienship in front of professionalism when it comes to jobs and responsibilities

Boston

ffs = For ****s sake, not fianna fail.

If you guys had of just stood up and said "We think the SU, Via some committee or another, should be able to vet and censer SU publications", then I would have at least respected what you tired to do. But rather you took this wishy washy approach of ****ing on about standards and anything else you could lump in. The motion was nothing more then an attack on the guy, it wasn't an attempt to improve standards in any concrete way, it wasn't anything more then a popularity contest.


btw, Thats an un biased opinion.

Ps Don't try to use homosexuality as a platform from which to attack people on issues which have nothing to do with it. It's fairly transparent.

Crash

in the SU, you quickly notice that committees are not the way. at least by mandates, mostly it skips the bureacracy and gets things done.

as an aside, the motion read as an attack at simon in relation to a position, which IMO as open game. if you're willing to take on a sabbatical job, then you're going to have to be open to criticism, and thats how it is. c'est la vie. in fairness, the motion was brought by someone who was previously heavily involved in the university record, and who used their friends as signee's. simple fact is that someone happened to find those people in the hist. once again, c'est la ****ing vie. thats how it works, oh well. It wasn't a popularity contest in that very few of those people are involved in the same circles, and the closest you could say would be if any of them would think of running for sabbat positions - which is fairly doubtful, so your point is mostly moot joe.

Boston

&#231 wrote: »

your point is mostly moot joe.

Good thing that wasn't my point. You're very mistaken if you think I know who any of the people involved are. The moton was intended as an indictment of Hall as deputy president. Which yes may be fair enough, but call a spade a spade, and lets not pretend it was a valient effort to improve standards.

"We the SU mandate that the deputy president does a better Job" is what it came down to. Whose to say what better or worse is in relation to the job the man does? People talk about this story that story and the other story that could have been printed, but where there people willign to write about those issues? How much control does Hall have over the relavence of articles to the Student body, and who, bare himself, actually has a mandate to decide what is or isn't relavent? Some in the SU think the coca cola is a hot topic for students, I mean come on.

But I digress, you talk about getting things done, what would the motion have done directly? Except be a vote of no-confidence in Hall?

I suppose we'll see in the next edition? I'd be very surprised if the same type of articles/cartoons will be in the next edition given the closeness of the vote, even if it didn't pass.

Crash

ok, having been privy to a number of "yeah, we saved the record!" conversations following, my issue is the simple fact that unfortunately the victory seems to have been seen by a number of people as open season, they won, therefore they can do what they want in the paper. not too happy bout that like.

Boston

A free press, "Oh No". meh.

Crash

yes, because i'm a totalitarian dictator who wants to control the press. thats it. great one liner. blown away by that one. phew.

Boston

Hey, you either believe in free press or you don't. I never claimed free press would be high brow or full of quality content. In my opinion it's more important that the publication be for the students in general and not allow a hand full of hacks plot the course.

LiouVille

LiouVille wrote:

I never claimed free press would be high brow or full of quality content.

From memory, I think the schedule of the SU constitution which dictates what publications the Deputy President has to produce mentions 'a regular and quality publication' or something to that effect.

Boston

Myth wrote:

From memory, I think the schedule of the SU constitution which dictates what publications the Deputy President has to produce mentions 'a regular and quality publication' or something to that effect.

Quality is an abstract term, you can't really hold someone to.

Boston

Boston wrote:

Quality is an abstract term, you can't really hold someone to.

I know! Still thought it needed to be mentioned.

SOL

Someone should sue for defamation, that would quickly sort things out. Not that throwing €10,000s down the tubes always makes the SU change their policy but the attention from the real world might.

strawberry

&#231 wrote: »

ok, two points. 1) any more accusations of John having written the article, unless they can be proven, will be deleted straight away. Don't just throw about opinion or rumour as fact, its plain stupid.

In respect to the agent article, I have a bit of a problem with this site being used out of context to back up an article. If el editor needs clarification of a point he can feel free to ask me in person, but the agent article was misleading as to what occurred on here.

As an objective (read faraway) observer, I would like to point out that whoever wrote it (1) seems to dislike the Hist intensely and (2) think that Josephine Curry is sexy and funny enough to merit putting it in her name like some sort of bad "My middle name is Danger" pun. Except worse because of the 'and'. Shocking copy. And also defamatory on many levels. People should sue student newspapers more. That way lawyers would make more money and students would shut up whinging about random gossipy **** when they should be worrying about their education.

Stargal

strawberry wrote:

People should sue student newspapers more. That way lawyers would make more money and students would shut up whinging about random gossipy **** when they should be worrying about their education.

Right, because we all know that lawyers don't make enough money already :rolleyes: And who says that the students making the complaints don't also focus on their education? Although I didn't necessarily agree with all of them, the arguments that were made about the article were engaged and articulate. It showed that people were thinking about and questioning the articles that they read in the student papers, rather than just accepting it all, which is an important ability to have in academia.

mcguirkj

I'm sure Jo wouldn't object to being called Sexy and Funny. She seemed quite pleased with it actually.

And as regards The Agent detesting the Hist, while it is certainly obvious that there has been an imbalance in his coverage of the society's internal politics, I also have no doubt that were the society not having a terrible year they'd be covered less.