Why we must hold our elected officials to account
From the village parish council to the House of Commons, a necessary condition of any democratic organisation is accountability. Our campus microcosm must not be the exception; the representatives of the Union must be accountable to its stakeholders, the students. Even more crucial is a force that will hold the University – and especially its inadequate, winged-monkey commercial services – to account.
Though the part played by those involved in student politics should not be undervalued, the majority of ensuring accountability rests on campus media’s shoulders. This is not to say that it is a burden accepted grudgingly. It would be ridiculous to suggest that, just like their national equivalents, campus media is not motivated by desires which occasionally result in relatively minor issues being blown out of proportion.
Though campus media does make mistakes, the service it provides is invaluable. If plans discussed by the University and the Union to further restrict the media come to fruition, campus media will be rendered effectively impotent.
The welfare argument advanced by the University holds no weight. University employees must be accountable to student consumers. Moreover, they are fundamentally distinct from the average student who is effectively, through the indirect route of YUSU funding, a stakeholder in all Union funded media.
The choice made by individuals to occupy elected positions also renders them fair game for campus media. This does not mean the individual forgoes their welfare entirely, just that they can be legitimately criticised on occasions which bear relevance to their job role.
Regrettably – as in the case of a former Welfare Sabbatical Officer – spill-over between work and personal life is sometimes inevitable.
Though the internet extenuates the matter, suggestions that the Nouse website should require a university log-in are farcical. The website has become a victim of its own success; the sheer number of hits has publicised the transgressions of York’s political sphere to a national audience. For the Union and the University to vindicate this accomplishment in order to hide their own shortcomings would be inexcusable. As well as damaging the reputation of York as a media university, it would constitute the coup de grace for the relative financial autonomy of Nouse as advertising revenues plummet. The issue will become even more pressing when Vision’s new website starts amassing equally contentious content.
This debate should not be conducted behind closed doors. Maybe there are tweaks that could be made to the media charter but nothing viable has emerged to date. Those involved in campus politics must recognise their commitment and the consequences should they renege on it.
Media scrutiny is a necessary reality of the job. If the black card and CV points don’t seem worth it in the face of this, sit down and enjoy immunity. If you do get involved, do so in the knowledge that the position you occupy can be legitimately and fairly criticised, and will be available for the whole world to see. Freedom of speech cannot be separated from the right to be heard; an attack on either constitutes an attack on both.
One response below. Comments are open.
Leave a Reply
Related Posts
Popular This Week
- Elections Night – Tim Ngwena re-elected president
- University criticised for allowing student to incur a personal debt of over £2,000 for campus event
- Exit polls reveal Hutchings to win Presidency
- Success on two fronts for the University Boat Club
- Ngwena takes Presidency for second year running
- It all ends tonight
Polls
Loading ...
When will our talented campus journalists realise that as long as they operate on University premises and receive YUSU funding that student welfare will always be more important than ‘free speech’ and ‘democratic accountability’?
They are ‘holding to account’ a group of students who (with the exception of 6 sabs) volunteer their time to make the student experience at this university as good as it can be. More time should be spent applauding their sacrifices and commitment than having a hissy fit when moves are made to reduce the impact that online archiving has on student welfare.
It is time to realise that you are reporting on students and not members of parliament with a £20k expense account.