Beavers everywhere have had to change with the times this year. Canada’s history magazine, who since 1920 has been The Beaver’s namesake, changed its name recently to avoid its modern association with a certain part of the female anatomy. Canada’s Beaver may have been killed, but despite repeated attempts on the life of this semi-aquatic rodent, our newspaper still stands strong – 61 years on.
It is unfortunate that the paper has had to defend itself on so many fronts this year, rather than simply focusing on our raison d’etre: providing a campus paper that we at the LSE can be proud of. Michaelmas term saw a motion entitled “Save the Beaver” put to the Union General Meeting (UGM), mandating the Union to return the Beaver to its “former glory”. What this means, exactly, we still do not know. And as the previous executive editor succinctly put: “As a contributor to the Beaver’s ‘former’ glory, I would like to tell the proposers of this motion to fuck off and be patronising to someone else.”
Thankfully, both the motion and a censure against myself based on the same logic, fell by comfortable margins. A censure is essentially a condemnation against an editor’s actions; a disciplinary action against “negligent, neglectful or deliberate actions which compromise the paper”. This censure, though, was based on nebulous rants of “dissatisfaction with the Beaver”, and the news section in particular. That both these public condemnations fell and evaporated into nothingness indicates that perhaps, these were actions of politically-motivated individuals attempting to punish the Beaver for merely doing its job, whoever that offends.
On a broader level, our Union has seen dramatic changes to its structure this year. A subject of much controversy, the persistent claims that students were “crying out” for a reformed Union remain unsubstantiated. We knew that we would be implicated in this revamp, but never realised how severely the changes could affect us. There were suddenly nine proposed conditions for our editorial independence, where previously this right was only infringed upon should an article be libelous or against the Union’s Equal Opportunities policy. Our finances were suddenly completely within the hands of the Union’s officials; finances that could always be retracted should we offend the powers that be. Thanks to a facebook group with 430 members, entitled “The Beaver Must Remain Editorially Independent”, and tireless work on the part of previous editors, most of the bye-law was rewritten. What came of it was a much more acceptable and fair protocol, which enshrined our editorial and financial independence. Even more remarkably, a proposed “media group fee”, voted on as one of the proposed reforms, fell by a thumping margin. With the help of everyone who has ever been involved and cared about the Beaver, we managed to ensure the paper remains accountable and responsible, but still untouchable.
While this year has been synonymous with particularly bitter sabbatical-Beaver relations, none of the above would have been possible without our dear General Secretary, Aled Dilywn Fisher. Despite a foolish attempt to pull an article on a mere club night without any justifiable reason, Aled was the most receptive to changing the Media Group protocols. While it was a huge victory for the Beaver, it was a victory that was very much dependent on the sabbaticals themselves. His measured and fair interaction with the paper and all its staff throughout the year, despite repeated abuse thrown at him in our pages, is definitely appreciated.
Unfortunately, his team of thuggish Rottweilers have hardly treated the paper and its staff with as much respect or fairness. LSESU Treasurer George Wetz and somewhat ironically, Education and Welfare Officer Emmanuel Akpan-Inwang were often snide, inconsiderate and immature in their dealings with the paper. It is with fondness that I look back on snide renegotiations of our budget, where even the Beaver’s gently-spoken General Manager was consistently talked down to. I remember libel check meetings, where phrases like “you are lying! you are living in a fairy-tale world!”, “fine, do you want to sit here and do this all night?” and “for a smart girl you are behaving very stupidly” were thrown at me, usually concerning articles that were not even by-lined by myself. Never mind the weekly grind of copy-editing 50 articles every week, or the occasional threat of libel suits – this has undoubtedly been the most trying part of my editorship. It is unfortunate that volunteers who spend hours putting out a paper that students can enjoy and contribute to for free end up feeling intimidated by elected officials for disagreeing with them. Perhaps they perceive this as doing their job; ensuring the welfare of the student body at large rather than the welfare of just the Beaver. However, on several occassions, there has been significant difference between their tones and mannerism in contrast to that of Fisher’s. This conduct is especially worrying since they are given £27,000 to ensure our “welfare”.
Amidst all this unnecessary and avoidable politics, the paper has grown remarkably since this time last year. We had more sign ups at fresher’s fair this year than ever before. Our pages have consistently bulged with content. This applies to almost all sections, apart from the News section which sometimes found itself scrambling for stories and desperately trying to fill its pages just hours before our print deadline. While the news section should not apologise for important investigations and daring to broach sticky subjects, it admittedly could have tried harder to represent the plethora of student concerns at the LSE. After all, there were one too many public lecture reviews in our paper over the past year. It is also admittedly a lot easier to report on paint peeling off the walls of the Quad, and blaming the Union for this, rather than looking into the School’s investments or staff wages. News editors could also have put more effort into training new writers, and making them feel included in decision making; a loyal team of reporters is vital to the sustainability of the paper.
This year has also seen a digital wave sweep across the Beaver. Our redeveloped and revamped website saw about 2,500 independent visitors last week alone, almost matching the distribution of our print version (3,500). The website has turned into a forum for comments, feedback and the occasional debate, fulfilling its purpose of getting more students involved and engaged with The Beaver.
Importantly, this year has heralded a new dawn for media group relations. It has seen combined media group socials and far more interaction between members of the media group than ever before. Notably, the Beaver even had a show on Pulse, and far more members of Pulse radio are not only taking an interest in the Beaver but contributing as well. With the reforms and the new Media Group protocol, there will be far more interaction between various aspects of the Media Group, hopefully pushing us to be less inward looking and a more student-friendly, cohesive, inclusive bloc.
The Beaver is definitely still on an upward trajectory, and continues to see our team of regular contributors expanding. Our editorial board is moving away from being a white, British “old boys club”, and represents the diversity at the LSE.
Furthermore, this paper has taken a far more ethical stance this year, treading important issues with concerns of welfare always in mind . We have taken a stand on issues of international human rights violations, and sexism on campus, to name a few. We have in the past been criticised for mercenary journalism, and picking on individuals for the sake of it, but have ensured that the officials criticised within these pages were always done on justifiable and substantiated grounds.
Of course, it is only appropriate to end this with a word of thanks. This year has seen past editors and members of the editorial board jumping at every opportunity to defend the paper and help out in any way possible. I would also like to thank our readers for continuing to justify our presence here on Houghton Street. I would like to thank Aled Dilwyn Fisher in particular for enduring labourious libel check meetings for not one, but two long years. I do, however, sincerely hope that the next editor can spend more time helping the paper grow and expand, and less time fighting unnecessary battles. I wish the Beaver best of luck for next year, and hope the paper remains a bastion of ethical journalism rather than a mercenary rag, abusing its monopoly on campus.
Related posts:
- One year on, a pageant for feminist progress
- Here’s to second year
- LSE in the Running for a successful year
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 08:16 and is filed under Comment.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
A dam-busting year for Beavers
by Shibani Mahtani on 16 Mar 2010 in Comment
Beavers everywhere have had to change with the times this year. Canada’s history magazine, who since 1920 has been The Beaver’s namesake, changed its name recently to avoid its modern association with a certain part of the female anatomy. Canada’s Beaver may have been killed, but despite repeated attempts on the life of this semi-aquatic rodent, our newspaper still stands strong – 61 years on.
It is unfortunate that the paper has had to defend itself on so many fronts this year, rather than simply focusing on our raison d’etre: providing a campus paper that we at the LSE can be proud of. Michaelmas term saw a motion entitled “Save the Beaver” put to the Union General Meeting (UGM), mandating the Union to return the Beaver to its “former glory”. What this means, exactly, we still do not know. And as the previous executive editor succinctly put: “As a contributor to the Beaver’s ‘former’ glory, I would like to tell the proposers of this motion to fuck off and be patronising to someone else.”
Thankfully, both the motion and a censure against myself based on the same logic, fell by comfortable margins. A censure is essentially a condemnation against an editor’s actions; a disciplinary action against “negligent, neglectful or deliberate actions which compromise the paper”. This censure, though, was based on nebulous rants of “dissatisfaction with the Beaver”, and the news section in particular. That both these public condemnations fell and evaporated into nothingness indicates that perhaps, these were actions of politically-motivated individuals attempting to punish the Beaver for merely doing its job, whoever that offends.
On a broader level, our Union has seen dramatic changes to its structure this year. A subject of much controversy, the persistent claims that students were “crying out” for a reformed Union remain unsubstantiated. We knew that we would be implicated in this revamp, but never realised how severely the changes could affect us. There were suddenly nine proposed conditions for our editorial independence, where previously this right was only infringed upon should an article be libelous or against the Union’s Equal Opportunities policy. Our finances were suddenly completely within the hands of the Union’s officials; finances that could always be retracted should we offend the powers that be. Thanks to a facebook group with 430 members, entitled “The Beaver Must Remain Editorially Independent”, and tireless work on the part of previous editors, most of the bye-law was rewritten. What came of it was a much more acceptable and fair protocol, which enshrined our editorial and financial independence. Even more remarkably, a proposed “media group fee”, voted on as one of the proposed reforms, fell by a thumping margin. With the help of everyone who has ever been involved and cared about the Beaver, we managed to ensure the paper remains accountable and responsible, but still untouchable.
While this year has been synonymous with particularly bitter sabbatical-Beaver relations, none of the above would have been possible without our dear General Secretary, Aled Dilywn Fisher. Despite a foolish attempt to pull an article on a mere club night without any justifiable reason, Aled was the most receptive to changing the Media Group protocols. While it was a huge victory for the Beaver, it was a victory that was very much dependent on the sabbaticals themselves. His measured and fair interaction with the paper and all its staff throughout the year, despite repeated abuse thrown at him in our pages, is definitely appreciated.
Unfortunately, his team of thuggish Rottweilers have hardly treated the paper and its staff with as much respect or fairness. LSESU Treasurer George Wetz and somewhat ironically, Education and Welfare Officer Emmanuel Akpan-Inwang were often snide, inconsiderate and immature in their dealings with the paper. It is with fondness that I look back on snide renegotiations of our budget, where even the Beaver’s gently-spoken General Manager was consistently talked down to. I remember libel check meetings, where phrases like “you are lying! you are living in a fairy-tale world!”, “fine, do you want to sit here and do this all night?” and “for a smart girl you are behaving very stupidly” were thrown at me, usually concerning articles that were not even by-lined by myself. Never mind the weekly grind of copy-editing 50 articles every week, or the occasional threat of libel suits – this has undoubtedly been the most trying part of my editorship. It is unfortunate that volunteers who spend hours putting out a paper that students can enjoy and contribute to for free end up feeling intimidated by elected officials for disagreeing with them. Perhaps they perceive this as doing their job; ensuring the welfare of the student body at large rather than the welfare of just the Beaver. However, on several occassions, there has been significant difference between their tones and mannerism in contrast to that of Fisher’s. This conduct is especially worrying since they are given £27,000 to ensure our “welfare”.
Amidst all this unnecessary and avoidable politics, the paper has grown remarkably since this time last year. We had more sign ups at fresher’s fair this year than ever before. Our pages have consistently bulged with content. This applies to almost all sections, apart from the News section which sometimes found itself scrambling for stories and desperately trying to fill its pages just hours before our print deadline. While the news section should not apologise for important investigations and daring to broach sticky subjects, it admittedly could have tried harder to represent the plethora of student concerns at the LSE. After all, there were one too many public lecture reviews in our paper over the past year. It is also admittedly a lot easier to report on paint peeling off the walls of the Quad, and blaming the Union for this, rather than looking into the School’s investments or staff wages. News editors could also have put more effort into training new writers, and making them feel included in decision making; a loyal team of reporters is vital to the sustainability of the paper.
This year has also seen a digital wave sweep across the Beaver. Our redeveloped and revamped website saw about 2,500 independent visitors last week alone, almost matching the distribution of our print version (3,500). The website has turned into a forum for comments, feedback and the occasional debate, fulfilling its purpose of getting more students involved and engaged with The Beaver.
Importantly, this year has heralded a new dawn for media group relations. It has seen combined media group socials and far more interaction between members of the media group than ever before. Notably, the Beaver even had a show on Pulse, and far more members of Pulse radio are not only taking an interest in the Beaver but contributing as well. With the reforms and the new Media Group protocol, there will be far more interaction between various aspects of the Media Group, hopefully pushing us to be less inward looking and a more student-friendly, cohesive, inclusive bloc.
The Beaver is definitely still on an upward trajectory, and continues to see our team of regular contributors expanding. Our editorial board is moving away from being a white, British “old boys club”, and represents the diversity at the LSE.
Furthermore, this paper has taken a far more ethical stance this year, treading important issues with concerns of welfare always in mind . We have taken a stand on issues of international human rights violations, and sexism on campus, to name a few. We have in the past been criticised for mercenary journalism, and picking on individuals for the sake of it, but have ensured that the officials criticised within these pages were always done on justifiable and substantiated grounds.
Of course, it is only appropriate to end this with a word of thanks. This year has seen past editors and members of the editorial board jumping at every opportunity to defend the paper and help out in any way possible. I would also like to thank our readers for continuing to justify our presence here on Houghton Street. I would like to thank Aled Dilwyn Fisher in particular for enduring labourious libel check meetings for not one, but two long years. I do, however, sincerely hope that the next editor can spend more time helping the paper grow and expand, and less time fighting unnecessary battles. I wish the Beaver best of luck for next year, and hope the paper remains a bastion of ethical journalism rather than a mercenary rag, abusing its monopoly on campus.
Related posts:
This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 08:16 and is filed under Comment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.