The final issue of The Fine Print was delayed by over a week. The physical copy was distributed only on the 10th of May, well in the middle of the comprehensive examinations. Since such a delay in the final issue is unusual, an explanation is owed to the reader.
While the issue had been collated, sent to print, and put up on the blog before the 28th of April, the printed issues were prevented from reaching the English Press Club (EPC). The issue was stalled by the President and General Secretary of the Students’ Union (SU) after being printed. EPC was forced to change the content of the SU Report Card and the article on the dispute between Music Club and CoStAA before the issues were re-printed. Given below is a short summary of the series of events that transpired.
All issues of The Fine Print are printed by the vendor approved by the SU. The issues were mailed to the vendor on the 28th of April, who told EPC that they could expect to receive the print issues in around 2 days. However, over the following few days, EPC did not receive the print issues. They also did not receive any updates from the vendor regarding the status of the issues. After several phone calls from EPC, the vendor informed the editor that he was unable to print the issues because his printers were supposedly not working.
No alternatives were provided to get the issues printed. Soon thereafter, the vendor stopped responding to the members of EPC altogether.
Since all payments for issues of The Fine Print are handled by the Corroboration and Review Committee (CRC), EPC reached out to them and informed them of the situation. CRC told the club that printing receipts for the issue had already been received and approved, and that it was unaware of any delays or problems in printing.
After several days of status quo, CRC was informed on the 3rd of May by the President and General Secretary of the SU, that they had blocked the issue from being printed and that the General Secretary would speak to EPC regarding the matter. It must be noted here that the issue had already been up on the blog since the 28th. Up until this point, there had been no communication whatsoever from any representative of the SU about concerns or complaints that the SU might have had with the content of EPC’s coverage of either the Music Club vs CoStAA dispute or the SU Report Card.
When the club spoke to the General Secretary on the 5th of May, he listed two primary problems the SU had with the issue. Firstly, the General Secretary disagreed with the metrics followed by the club while awarding grades in the SU report. The grading system as a whole was found to be “subjective” and the club was told that the grades needed to be removed entirely. It must be noted here that when the President and the General Secretary were interviewed for the progress reports on their manifestos for the purpose of this article, they expressed no such reservations against the concept of handing out grades. Secondly, the coverage of the Music Club vs CoStAA dispute was found to be “biased”. The General Secretary said that the CoStAAn who had been interviewed for the aforementioned article did not represent the views of the entirety of the CoStAA, and the article should have included the views of the President and General Secretary instead. The President and General Secretary made it clear to the club that these changes had to be made if issues were to be printed this semester.
In the interim, CRC had learnt from the vendor that he had printed the issues by the 28th of April, and that the issues had been prevented from reaching EPC by the President. CRC soon conveyed this information to EPC. When EPC confronted the President and General Secretary about this revelation on the night of May 5th in the presence of a CRC member, the President admitted that the issues had been printed, but refused to concede any further. He did not provide any justification for the vendor not sending the issues, and he continued to claim that the vendor hadn’t been contacted by him until the 3rd of May. No further explanation was provided for their actions, and they simply reiterated that the only way for EPC to have a print issue this semester was to make the two changes they had demanded earlier.
Given that it was almost the end of the semester, EPC was forced to give in to the demands of the President and General Secretary and make the aforementioned changes. Their interviews were taken, transcribed, and the modified article was written, all in between the comprehensive examinations. The issue was redesigned to update the article and remove all grades from the SU Report. However, the original version of the issue is still up on the blog.
We, at the English Press Club ask that in the future, objections to our content be raised directly and immediately to the editor. We are always ready to accept suggestions, receive criticism, defend our content, and make changes if necessary. We take full responsibility for the veracity, objectivity, and impartiality of our published articles, and we hope that all issues in the future can be resolved without resorting to illicit or clandestine means. We do not intend to let this incident set precedent for external interference in our work.