NEWS: Gown gagged. Again.

Posted on by

QUBSU: your student’s union…unless you disagree with them.

The Gown has once again been suspended indefinitely from its office in the Students’ Union. The decision was taken unilaterally by Andrew Dodge, the unelected Director of the Students’ Union. The Union has again stopped The Gown from being distributed to students in the Union building.

UPDATE: Statement from The Gown Trust.

Dodge apparently based his decision on concerns over an article in today’s edition of the paper, which explains the paper’s recent spat with the Union. 

A memorandum was presented to Gown management earlier in the year in which the editor was asked to agree to a number of requests. These included the Union seeing all publications before they go to print, that the Union manager or President could sit in on The Gown Trust meetings, and that cold calling on Union staff and sabbaticals was forbidden. The Gown team was presented with the final draft of the memorandum last week. 

The decision to preserve the newspaper’s decades-long independence was included in Editor Catherine Wylie’s front page report in today’s print edition. Wylie said: “At no time in the history of The Gown, has the editorial team allowed Union staff to see issues before they go to print, and this won’t change.” Dodge has reacted to these assertions by renewing the office suspension. 

The Gown has received no information to suggest this substantial assault on free speech in the student body was discussed among, let alone sanctioned by, elected Union officials. President Shane Brogan has been unavailable for comment. 

At no point was The Gown’s previous suspension linked to any conditions regarding acceptance of the Union’s draconian curbs on a free campus press.

 

UPDATE: Statement from Gown Trust.

Gown have been locked out of their office today after publishing details of the protocol the students’ union was trying to make them sign. 

This shameful action contradicts the University’s Charter and Students’ Union Constitution which states that one of the aims of the Students’ Union is to promote and support “the opportunity of freedom of expression”. 

Gown has been operating as an independent student newspaper for half a century at Queen’s University. 

The Union has been pressurising the editorial staff by threatening to take away their office space if they do not sign a protocol under which they would have to accede to unreasonable demands, such as giving up the right to exclusive use of an office – which has for decades been available to them, a recognition of the key part the paper plays in the life of the university – and providing the Students’ Union sight of all editions before they are made publicly available. 

This would completely erode the independence of the newspaper. 

This action is a blow against freedom of expression for the students at Queens University and strikes at the heart of the universal concept of press freedom. It is totally unacceptable. The editor has the full support of the trust.

 
 

76 thoughts on “NEWS: Gown gagged. Again.”

  1. @ Hang on a second

    There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding and many inaccurate perceptions of the situation at the moment. Yes, the final draft of the memo was produced by myself and Gown business manager Brendan Hughes. It is an extremely watered down version of the initial proposal made by the Union on 1st February, in which it was made clear that the Union hoped The Gown would agree to, among other things, show copies in advance of print.

    At no point did we say that we would sign the current memo, and we certainly didn’t state a time frame in which we would sign it. We were unaware that our getting back into our office depended on our signing of this document. As far as we were concerned, due to our next edition not due until September, we had some time to make a final decision with The Gown Trust. As editor, I think it is unreasonable for the Union to expect me to sign a binding document in The Gown’s 55th year in existence. There has been 55 years without a document and I certainly would want to ensure that should I sign anything that it is a well informed and well advised decision.

    Having sought advice from The Gown Trust and various Gown alumni, we have been advised that it would be a mistake to sign the document in its current form.

    I would also like to point out at this conjecture the fact that the clause on the memo which stipulates that the Union see copies prior to distribution has been unfortunately misunderstood by the Union. As it currently stands, it says that the editor should “endeavour to” and that it would be “subject to The Gown’s code of practise”. It does not say that the editor is “obliged to” show advance copies.

    Dodge’s decision to impose a second ban on The Gown on Monday appeared to be based on this particular clause, coupled with the fact that I have yet to sign anything. In regard to the article on the front page, I thought that it was important for people to know the facts, and all information included in that article is lifted straight from EMC minutes and Union documents.

    I am aware that President Brogan sent an email to council in which he refers to my article and says that references I have made are “inaccurate”. I was appalled by this statement in his email, and feel that it is absolutely necessary to point out that my article clearly states that I was referring to a proposal made by the Union earlier in the year. I would be more than happy to forward this particular document to council.

    I also feel that the offending article pointed out some very interesting facts in the situation. A key point being that no falsehoods by Gown were submitted by sabbatical officers when requested by the President. The Union is keen to point out any mistakes made by The Gown this year, which I can assure you are few and far between. Yet few people would know that an error made on the front page of the 14th December issue wasn’t brought to my attention until near the end of January.

    Any error is bad journalism and I in no way condone instances such as these. I want to be a journalist and I can assure you that I want to be a GOOD journalist. However, if the Union are to complain about this instance then the fact that they didn’t consider it worthwhile complaining to the editor as soon as they read the paper on 14th December is surely questionable. I hope some things have been cleared up here, and I thank you for reading The Gown all year. If you have any other questions I’ll be happy to answer.

    @Anon

    We are still banned from the office. A new meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday at 11am.

    Catherine Wylie
    Editor

  2. I’m sorry, I don’t believe I issued a manifesto claiming all sorts of fantastic things about how I would work for students.

    This is from Shane Brogan’s statement on the QUBSU website

    “ensuring that students have their voice heard at every level in the University “.

    With this evidence I have no problem in calling Shane Brogan a liar. That is not a libellous statement. Shane Brogan has clearly stated in print that he would be “ensuring that students have their voice heard at every level in the University” and has actively perused an opposite course of action, making him by definition a liar.

  3. @ Rear Mudguard: So, if we are not happy with the performance of the officers WE elected, we must shut up unless we are willing to stand ourselves? Is this also the case with national Politics? I am pissed off with the way new labour has ruined aspects of the country, but I cannot criticise unless I am willing to stand as an MP?

  4. Just out of curiosity, why are so many people posting without putting forward their names? If you have an opinion you think is valid, surely you would want your name tied to it.

  5. see below

    Comments will not be published if:

    You reveal any private information about yourself or anyone else, such as contact details.

    Your local college can help you address these essential skills needs

  6. I do not know the ins and outs of the argument. However one thing I do know is that Queens as a ‘business’ is phasing out any potential scuppering of their own future plans. I have no doubt this has come from the higher echelons of the University personally. The Gown as a newspaper should never sacrifice its independance and its name for the sake of a few people who have thrown their toys out of the pram. To take criticism is one thing but to react in such a manner as the Union has done is reminicent of the censorship years of the BBC and Thatcher in 1988. Alrite I hear some people say that is a bit far fetched but everything is seen within context and scale. This is an excercise of power and if anything a silly one. To finish a wise man once said, ‘Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” Queens Union is in an unhealthy state to say the least and to be honest I hope they get what they deserve after all its just business.

  7. A worrying development to say the least, even more so when you consider the attempt at censorship is coming from someone representing the actual Univeristy, a place where free thinking and speech is to be encouraged and praised. I think Mr Dodge needs to step back and take a long look at himself, and if he doesn’t then hopefully somebody will for him.

  8. What is the current VP Campaigns (the future Preident of the SU) doing about this? Is a campaign to lift the ban ready for Monday morning?

  9. Why was Mondays edition the last copy of the gown for THIS ACEDEMIC YEAR?

    Maybe I am mistaken but I though students were here until May/June.

    What happened guys? You just get lazy?

  10. I think it’s time for a petition!!!
    Or protest!!!

    Also if the gown publishes something the su doesn’t like maybe they should think why are the gown saying this about us? Is it true? And do something to fix it. The voice of the students should not only be heard but acted upon!!!!

  11. Hey Alan,

    The rest of the academic year is deceptively long. Queen’s students have only one more week, and then three weeks easter break, in which we suspect there will be nothing substantial to report.

    We were intending to do two more issues during the four remaining weeks after easter, but we decided against this for several reasons:

    a. We intend to use the time to assemble a new team of student volunteers.
    b. We will be creating a new internal code of practice to ensure standards are maintained within the newspaper, duties of the team are stipulated, and editorial positions are assigned based solely on merit.
    c. Many of our core team are final year students, so we need to concentrate on our degrees! The fact therefore that many of us will be leaving the paper adds pressure to recruit a strong team for next year.

    The Gown has produced 11 issues this year. We are incredibly happy with this as it is the most editions produced during an academic term for around 30 years. Also, our website has really taken off this term. Just yesterday we set a new record of 9496 page views in one day.

    Coverage will of course continue on this site, so we’d encourage all readers to keep checking for the latest news, and more besides.

    Brendan Hughes
    advertising@thegown.org.uk

  12. This is ridiculous. Dodge, Brogan and certain members of the exec committee are clearly not looking out for their students and instead, looking out for themselves. They should respect the independence of the student newspaper that has been running since 1955! It was around long before them and will remain as an important part of QUB after them.

    Lets just hope Mc Greevy doesn’t become another one of Mr. Dodge’s little lap dogs. I wont hold my breath though.

    Ps. I’m sure you don’t need me to tell you this but… Don’t sign anything!!

  13. It is amazing to see so much support for The Gown. It shows that many Queen’s students actually care. How about listening to your students for once ‘President’ Brogan? Or is this matter simply out of your hands?

  14. The current editorial team are doing a fantastic job. The website is great, even with the suspension in place! Keep up the good work! :)