One potato, two potato
It looks like The Cheese Grater is not the only media society to have provoked the formidable ire of Communication and Services Officer Charlie Clinton. Pi Magazine were recently told they would have to submit every article to Clinton for approval before they went into the magazine, disrupting publication and heaping unnecessary stress on the editors. Previously, Pi had only sent a finished draft of the the magazine for approval. When Clinton’s change of tack was queried he replied that the newspaper Pi Squared was already doing it, so why couldn’t Pi Magazine? Funnily enough, Pi squared were doing nothing of the sort and had also ignored Clinton’s unwelcome instructions.
Clinton’s justification is eerily familiar. He told Pi that when they published potentially controversial articles it was “his neck on the line.” He claimed that he would have to deal with any resulting complaints or lawsuits. While this may be true it certainly doesn’t give Clinton the right to go above and beyond the call of duty and muscle in on the editorial process. Hypocritically, Clinton hasn’t allowed Pi to edit his Union page despite it clashing with the rest of the magazine’s layout and style.
Clinton seems unduly concerned to avoid being sued, even if this means media societies are forced to turn out publications with about as much punch as a soggy biscuit. The ability to run stories the mainstream press wouldn’t dare to print is half the point of student media. If Clinton is worried about how legal action might affect his future prospects, perhaps he should consider how well a record of censoring the student press might go down among western law circles. Like a cup of cold mashed potato no doubt.
Well fair welfare
The new year could see a dramatic restructuring of student representation at UCL. Over the summer the Sabbs discussed the creation of Welfare Groups at UCL Union, based on the Liberation Groups currently existing in the NUS.
It is hoped that the new structure will patch over current failings in the Clubs and Societies system. At present, there is no formal recognition of the special requirements of welfare societies at UCL and many rely on loopholes in Union regulations. Welfare Groups will allow societies to act in the best interests of their members rather than complying with Clubs and Societies rules.
Welfare Officer Kate Rowley used LGBT Society as an example of how the current Clubs and Societies system cannot provide sufficient support for interest groups. LGBT already sits somewhat outside Union rules. It is the only society to elect an officer to Union Council and remains the only society with an accepted grant to spend on socials. They do not have to charge a membership fee, nor achieve the 30 members required by other societies to remain affiliated. The inherent value of the society to the students it represents makes it necessary to bypass usual Union procedure. However exemptions make it difficult for the society to be regulated by the Student Activities officer, the CSC staff and Activities Board. The numerous grey areas of union policy make it unclear when LGBT are in the wrong and consequently they sometimes lose out as a result of unfair disciplinary action.
Under the current system, the aims and objectives of interest groups sometimes conflict with Club and Society regulations as they often lack clear aims throughout the year and member students may have nothing in common beyond their need for specific representation.
According to notes from a preliminary briefing in August, the groups likely to receive special representation will be black or minority ethnic students, disabled students, international students, LGBT students, students of faith and women.
The Welfare Groups are due to be launched in One World Week although there is currently no room in the Union budget to create these additional groups. UCL Union is looking into options for external funding from private diversity funds. Grants are currently unevenly distributed with long-established societies such as LGBT receiving generous funding while newer groups have no allocated funds at all.
