To The Reader,
In response to the Student Union’s Facebook post, The English Press Club (EPC) would like to reiterate the sequence of events that took place. Issues were sent to print on the 28th of April, and the vendor assured EPC that the issues would be printed in a couple of days. However, the issues were not delivered on time. On the 1st of May, the vendor claimed his printers weren’t working, and then stopped responding to calls from members of EPC altogether. It was only on the 5th of May that EPC found out through the Corroboration and Review Committee (CRC) that the issues had been printed on time, but had been stalled by the SU representatives. The account provided in the SU post does not account for the delay in sending issues by the vendor.
CGPA for the manifesto progress… manifesto point a success.
The intention behind assigning units to manifesto points was to capture their relative importance. It is irrefutable that some manifesto points, such as those regarding the healthcare facilities on campus or the deferred placement scheme, are more important than others, such as SU merchandise. This is visible even during campaigning when certain manifesto points tend to take center stage, while others are sidelined.
Also, it must be noted that…. requested to edit the issue.
An end-of-the-year grade card has been a feature in The Fine Print for a few years now. In the past, EPC has received no complaints regarding the practice of assigning grades to each manifesto point. Further, the President and the General Secretary raised no objections to this method of evaluation at the time of being interviewed. EPC was only notified of objections to the idea of assigning grades a week after the SU Report had already been made public on the blog.
Upon inquiring, a member of English Press Club on the condition of not being named told the Union that the grading metrics was changed from last year because both the President and General Secretary were scoring exceedingly high and English Press Club did not want that to happen.
This statement is verifiably false. The CGPAs of the President and General Secretary were not computed until the grading metric was finalised. Moreover, it can be independently verified that if units are removed from the report and all grades are weighted equally, the CGPAs of both the President and General Secretary decrease to exactly 7.0. In other words, the shift in grading metric actually increased the CGPAs of both the President and the General Secretary.
The English Press Club urges the SU to refrain from making allegations unless they are willing to cite their sources.
The article on the APOGEE Inauguration Dispute…. grossly misrepresenting the facts.
The dispute that occurred during the APOGEE Inauguration was an issue of scheduling, as there was a delay in proceedings and certain components of the Inauguration had to be curtailed. Consequently, EPC first reached out to the CoStAAn of the Department of Controls. While he did not wish to speak on the record, he suggested that EPC interview the CoStAAn of PEP or the President instead, as he claimed that they played a larger role in the proceedings. EPC reached out to both of them. Only the CoStAAn of PEP responded – the President did not pick up his phone. The interview with the PEP CoStAAn was recorded, transcribed, and the relevant sections of the final article were reviewed by him before publication.
The President and the General Secretary also act as the Finance and the Inventory CoStAAns respectively, and in that capacity are also members of the CoStAA. At no stage was it indicated that the dispute with Music Club was limited to the SU post-holders only. Further, the allegation that EPC did not want to include the views of the SU representatives is false as the President was called for the purpose of this article.
Point 5 of article 1 of the constitution of English Press Club…. the beginning of the next semester.
Please note that EPC does not abscond from or refute criticism. EPC actively encourages feedback and constructive criticism from our readers. The club is always ready to sit down and discuss the purported flaws in an article or method. It simply asks that objections are raised in a timely and appropriate manner. Having said that, EPC rejects all current allegations of bias and/or misinformation in its articles. The club has stated the sources for all its content, and it has been transparent with the methodology followed while writing.