Possibly about to become the most over-used phrase in my essays, Harold Macmillan’s words have become relevant to my last term at Leeds.
The newspaper has been going strongly, with some fantastic pieces (see the post below for proof!), including a piece on energy use, student housing and library fines. I had very little to do with those though!
Three pieces I’ve written in the last 10 weeks have caused debate, complaints and possible lawsuits.
The first one was on the student occupation of Botany house. The main controversy was over the headline “Extremist’s “stir up tensions on campus.” I’ll defend this headline with my life, as it was never meant to cause offence. In twenty-first century vocabulary, extremist is linked with Islamic terrorists. It was never meant like that. They were referred to as extremists as taking a university building is a fairly extreme form of protest – especially given that last year LUU’s most exciting protests were cake sales! The fact that we did not print a quote which would have portrayed them as extremists shows that we were balanced and not out to do a simple hack job (One protester admitted to being for the destruction of the British state). For me, this was the best piece that I’ve written this year, and I loved the fact that in that week, I had the time to interview the protesters, look round the house, and do the first of Leeds Student’s now infamous page 4 and 5 spread.
The second piece to cause controversy has been the most dangerous to me personally, although I realised that if it came to anything serious, I would be clear of charges. The piece “Racism row engulfs Union” was about allegations of racism by an LUU member against LS: TV. LS: TV were understandably keen to try to limit the damage of the story – this included taking legal action against myself and the newspaper! I would like to explain a bit here about why I was clear, and LS: TV had themselves to blame. Firstly, they were aware of what was going to happen, and when I tried to talk to the station manager about the incident, his line was “It’s all in the statement.” I tried to explain the serious matter of the allegations to him, but he refused point-blank. This gave him a right to reply, something he later claimed he never had. I also spoke to the interviewer of the piece, which meant that I had spoken to a fairly key member of the team making the piece.
The key claim of racism was made through a script which had been written, claiming that the member of LUU was “the person with the Palestinian flag behind her desk.” LS: TV claimed that this was never written – there are multiple copies of the script everywhere. LS: TV wanted to sue us for defamation. I will argue that what I published was researched journalism which was in the public interest – at no point did the newspaper take a stance, we reported it as it was. Fair, unbiased journalism.
Although one can argue that the article was tabloided up – that had nothing to do with me. The final decisions were those of the editor, and I stand by those too. Both sides need to come together on this, and be reasonable. This appears to be happening, as tension has cooled. In future, I think greater communication from both sides is required, and that the next manager of LS: TV needs to be less hasty in making assumptions, as well as calming themselves when sending serious emails.
Finally, the final complaints came from the “Sex attack on campus” article. This was my first real crime story, and took a lot of legal work from Laurie, to whom I am grateful. One complaint argues that we link the victim to the cottaging that take place – at no point do we do this. Whilst we need to treat this with compassion, I am not too worried about its ramifications. This was an interesting story to write, and got me my front page of the term.
Only three issues left now, and then the team moves on. I will miss Virginia and Claire – they have been great fellow editors. Hopefully Matty and I will continue as News editors – he has been a revelation this year, and we write well together. I don’t believe I will be made associate next year – I would love to be one, and believe I would be good in the role, but I will embrace the News editorship with both hands once again to be the most complained about writer on the team!
On a personal level, the term has been a good one. Exams went well – much better than expected (a 69, 68 and 66), and I got my first ever first on an essay (76). Modules this semester are very enjoyable – I just hope I can continue to get good grades.
I started with “Events dear boy, events.” I’ll end with that too, as that is the only answer I will give to an event in my personal life that makes me very happy.
To all my readers (all 4 of them!), have a good Easter.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Sex attack on campus
Police appeal for witnesses after alleged afternoon assault in Parkinson toilets
Police are appealing for witnesses after a male student was the victim of a alleged serious sexual assault on campus.
A 21-year-old male student was reportedly attacked in the basement toilets of the Parkinson building between the hours of 1pm and 3pm on February 19.
The University has moved to reassure its students that their welfare is of utmost importance. “We were saddened and shocked to hear about the alleged sexual assault in Parkinson building reported last week,” a University spokesperson said. “These incidents are, fortunately, very rare and it is the first incident of its type ever reported on campus.”
The incident occurs in the wake of several Leeds Student investigations into the Parkinson’s toilets, a known hotspot for males cruising for sex.
In 2007 patrols in the Parkinson building were stepped up as a result of this paper’s articles into anonymous sex cruising, or ‘cottaging’ in the same facilities.The University explained that campus safety measures would again be examined in light of this particluar incident.
‘Cottaging’ refers to homosexual encounters in public lavatories, often arranged anonymously through Internet sites.As early as 2005, Leeds Student revealed that in the Parkinson basement toilets “men would meet up for regular lunchtime liaisons and use the self-drilled spy-holes to peer at others.”
The sexuality of the attacker in the alleged assault is, as yet, unknown.
An investigation of Squirt.org, a website where ‘cruisers’ can agree to meet up, revealed the popularity of the Parkinson as a cottaging venue. One site member described a recent visit to the toilets: “Sat after noon was great here. Loads of guys to chose (sic) from.”
Postings regarding the toilets were still being made in the days leading up to the recently alleged attack, with one appearing just seven hours earlier.The message, posted at 6.19am on Thursday February 19 asked: “Who goin 2 day”, while another posted the day before read: “Anyone about 2m, 4ish?”
The website has since warned members to remain vigilant. The post by Ed, the Squirt Editor, told members to continue to “cruise carefully” and also warned them to beware of attention from media and police at other local sites.Another member warned fellow cruisers to be wary after he, “Popped in here today around 12pm and noticed some CID officers having a good look around this place, so beware guys, they are on the prowl.”
The website details directions to the Parkinson building, including bus routes and nearest car parks. It claims that the best time to be there is “In the afternoon” as there are “lots of horny students ready to work off that tension.” There are 100 comments about the location, and it receives a 4 star rating.
Steve Smith, the writer of both articles on cottaging in the Parkinson toilets commented: “We exposed the Parkinson toilets as a popular location for cottagers across the city in 2005 and again highlighted the dangers of continuing activities in 2007.
“For the University not to have stamped this out in three and a half years is little short of negligent and shows a complete disregard for the welfare of students.”
Steve continued: “Usually cottaging is a paranoid and subtle activity that is far from aggressive, yet I'm not shocked that a sexual attack has taken place. Any location open to the public where these acts are left unchecked, welcomes a range of possible dangers.
Matthew Edwards, LGBT events and promotions officer, called for a thorough and sensitive investigation into the assault:
“The LGBT Society is very concerned about the attacks in Parkinson basement toilets. The issue needs to be dealt with in a mature and delicate way that protects users of the toilets without discriminating against any potential users.”
The University said that campus safety measures would be examined: “The safety of our students, staff and visitors is paramount and we are looking at how any further incidents can be prevented, including increasing the number of CCTV cameras and the number of security patrols."
“If anyone does feel uncomfortable about an approach or the behaviour of others then they should report this to University security on their emergency number 0113 343 2222.”
Information about personal safety is available at www.luuonline.com or students can contact the Student Advice Centre.Anyone who was in the area at the time or anyone with any information is asked to contact North West Leeds CID on 0845 6060606.
Posted in Issue 15 - LS1 > News on Friday 6th March, 2009
Police are appealing for witnesses after a male student was the victim of a alleged serious sexual assault on campus.
A 21-year-old male student was reportedly attacked in the basement toilets of the Parkinson building between the hours of 1pm and 3pm on February 19.
The University has moved to reassure its students that their welfare is of utmost importance. “We were saddened and shocked to hear about the alleged sexual assault in Parkinson building reported last week,” a University spokesperson said. “These incidents are, fortunately, very rare and it is the first incident of its type ever reported on campus.”
The incident occurs in the wake of several Leeds Student investigations into the Parkinson’s toilets, a known hotspot for males cruising for sex.
In 2007 patrols in the Parkinson building were stepped up as a result of this paper’s articles into anonymous sex cruising, or ‘cottaging’ in the same facilities.The University explained that campus safety measures would again be examined in light of this particluar incident.
‘Cottaging’ refers to homosexual encounters in public lavatories, often arranged anonymously through Internet sites.As early as 2005, Leeds Student revealed that in the Parkinson basement toilets “men would meet up for regular lunchtime liaisons and use the self-drilled spy-holes to peer at others.”
The sexuality of the attacker in the alleged assault is, as yet, unknown.
An investigation of Squirt.org, a website where ‘cruisers’ can agree to meet up, revealed the popularity of the Parkinson as a cottaging venue. One site member described a recent visit to the toilets: “Sat after noon was great here. Loads of guys to chose (sic) from.”
Postings regarding the toilets were still being made in the days leading up to the recently alleged attack, with one appearing just seven hours earlier.The message, posted at 6.19am on Thursday February 19 asked: “Who goin 2 day”, while another posted the day before read: “Anyone about 2m, 4ish?”
The website has since warned members to remain vigilant. The post by Ed, the Squirt Editor, told members to continue to “cruise carefully” and also warned them to beware of attention from media and police at other local sites.Another member warned fellow cruisers to be wary after he, “Popped in here today around 12pm and noticed some CID officers having a good look around this place, so beware guys, they are on the prowl.”
The website details directions to the Parkinson building, including bus routes and nearest car parks. It claims that the best time to be there is “In the afternoon” as there are “lots of horny students ready to work off that tension.” There are 100 comments about the location, and it receives a 4 star rating.
Steve Smith, the writer of both articles on cottaging in the Parkinson toilets commented: “We exposed the Parkinson toilets as a popular location for cottagers across the city in 2005 and again highlighted the dangers of continuing activities in 2007.
“For the University not to have stamped this out in three and a half years is little short of negligent and shows a complete disregard for the welfare of students.”
Steve continued: “Usually cottaging is a paranoid and subtle activity that is far from aggressive, yet I'm not shocked that a sexual attack has taken place. Any location open to the public where these acts are left unchecked, welcomes a range of possible dangers.
Matthew Edwards, LGBT events and promotions officer, called for a thorough and sensitive investigation into the assault:
“The LGBT Society is very concerned about the attacks in Parkinson basement toilets. The issue needs to be dealt with in a mature and delicate way that protects users of the toilets without discriminating against any potential users.”
The University said that campus safety measures would be examined: “The safety of our students, staff and visitors is paramount and we are looking at how any further incidents can be prevented, including increasing the number of CCTV cameras and the number of security patrols."
“If anyone does feel uncomfortable about an approach or the behaviour of others then they should report this to University security on their emergency number 0113 343 2222.”
Information about personal safety is available at www.luuonline.com or students can contact the Student Advice Centre.Anyone who was in the area at the time or anyone with any information is asked to contact North West Leeds CID on 0845 6060606.
Posted in Issue 15 - LS1 > News on Friday 6th March, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)