UCL Union

Should a commercial newspaper like 'The Sanctuary' be allowed a share of the student media at UCL without being affiliated? So far, The Sanctuary franchise has newspapers at Warwick, Bristol, Nottingham and Durham, all of which claim to be 'independent' in the sense that they aren't affiliated. Now this may sound like a good thing, but at the same time it begs the question of whether they're simply a bog-standard freesheet aimed at the student market, with a few students from the university chipping in to make the job look authentic. Any views?

It seems to me that we affiliate our media societies (of which there a pretty good variety here for people to choose from, in my opinion) for two reasons; firstly, to ensure that the support we give (money, sabb/staff time, access to an audience) goes straight to benefiting our students and rewarding their work and secondly, to make sure that our student journalism is responsible and accountable to its community. It seems to me that The Sanctuary doesn't really tick either of those boxes.

Just to declare my position for all to see:
- I have never applied for a post at any Sanctuary magazine
- I have never been offered or refused a post at any Sanctuary magazine
- I have never written for or offered to write for any Sanctuary magazine
- To my knowledge, neither my name nor that of any of my friends or relations has never appeared in relation to any article published by any Sanctuary magazine
- I have never held any conversation in excess of passing niceties with anyone working for or involved with the Sanctuary
- I write for The Cheese Grater magazine, where my role is to report honestly and without factual error. Neither I nor The Cheese Grater magazine hold any vendetta against any of The Sanctuary magazines.
- The post made above asks questions about The Sanctuary magazine and asks for the views of others. It is my view that open discussion would be beneficial regarding this matter.

Oh dear. It would seem that the website hasn't recognised the last two posts - posts 1+3 are from me, Alex Ashman. Post 2 is not mine.

Why does it matter? if it's no good then people won't read it. Surely competition is a good thing and who knows it might stop the affiliated editors allowing half the rubbish that makes its way into the affiliated publications from being printed.

Who would have thought that a student newspaper could cause so much controversy? I certainly didn't. In my eyes The Sanctuary, hasn’t really done anything wrong. They have managed to publish and distribute two editions even without the backing and support of the Union. They seem to be going about their own businesses without interfering with others and haven’t broken any obvious rules. It's a real shame, however, that so many people have targeted them - including London Students/Cheese Grater and Pi - the real irony for me is that on the one hand these people are criticising The Sanctuary for being so 'rubbish' yet at the same time appear to be worried about the competition it will generate. If The Sanctuary is really that bad why are such student publications worried and constantly feeling that they should make life harder for them? Surely if The Sanctuary is out of their league then it shouldn't matter what the Sanctuary are doing!
I genuinely think this petty war should end - it's an embarrassment that such intelligent people are actually having full fledged battles – in fact the Cheese Grater even went so far as to write a piece about the Sanctuary and the Directorial Editor, Elcid – ignoring the small fact that that is completely illegal and they would have been done for slander /defamation in a split second (surprising how they did not pick up on this small point earlier!) – It was just needless! There was no reason to take this war on a personal level.
For those who want nothing more than the downfall of the paper, unfortunately you may find that you all have actually contributed to its success. By causing such an uproar and with the discussion still not put to rest, you’re just given them the best publicity they needed, with students now actually wanting to read the paper more to see what the hype is really about. Even this very forum – you’ve just given them more exposure by having their name in big bold letters on the home page of the UCL Union website – nice one guys!

I take it you mean the piece by Harry Stopes that starts on the front page of Issue 15 of The Cheese Grater. I can't see any mention of an Elcid - it's all about the newspaper's owner Tom Freeman. What exactly is "completely illegal" about the piece? Are you claiming that the magazine has published a slanderous/defaming piece? It sounds like you have a vested interest in this matter.

As for the problem of The Sanctuary having arrived at UCL - they have an uncanny knack for taking advertising away from genuine campus magazines and newspapers. Whilst affiliated papers are non-for-profit and plough the revenue back into the magazine, there is little doubt that The Sanctuary's owner draws a reasonable salary from the advertising money.

As for "full fledged battles" - that's hyperbole. It's nowhere near that exciting.

"I take it you mean the piece by Harry Stopes that starts on the front page of Issue 15 of The Cheese Grater. I can't see any mention of an Elcid - it's all about the newspaper's owner Tom Freeman. What exactly is "completely illegal" about the piece? Are you claiming that the magazine has published a slanderous/defaming piece? It sounds like you have a vested interest in this matter." (2:01PM on 19 December 2007)

Thanks for exposing yourself, Mr.Ashman/rest-api/whatever else you like to call yourself! It seems being deceitful comes naturally to you - especially when trying to cover your tracks! The piece written about me to which Seema is referring to, lest you conveniently forget, was trashed wisely by your editor Mark, otherwise you/him/union would have been facing defamation charges, of which i was confidently prepared to undertake.

"Just to declare my position for all to see:
- I have never applied for a post at any Sanctuary magazine
- I have never been offered or refused a post at any Sanctuary magazine"
(2:28PM on 8 December 2007)

Moreover, a further exposition of deceitfulness reveals that following on from April 5, you applied twice to work at the Sanctuary, using the words "tentatively interested" as an introduction. I can always paste the full email here if you wish?

Best :)

The rest-api thing is not anyone hiding behind a fake username, just a quirk of the forum.

Also, I'm sorry but having read the original article you refer to (which was never going to be printed in that form anyway) there is absolutely categorically nothing illegal or defamatory about you (Elcid) in it. Its withdrawal had absolutely nothing to do with you and was entirely based on the editors' conversations with Farbod.

And finally, could people act with a bit more dignity on here - no point turning it into a slanging match, is there?

Sorry Sean, I'll try not to make things worse.

I wrote the piece Elcid mentions, and that piece was not to be published unless the usual procedure had been followed (ie right of reply). It was an error on my part to forward a draft to Farbod - I was just trying to communicate as honestly as possible by showing him what we had written. I assume that Farbod provided Elcid with a copy.

Meanwhile, The Cheese Grater ran a piece about Tom Freeman, which appeared in Issue 15 of the magazine (see http://www.cheesegratermagazine.org/ ). While the Elcid piece never entered the public domain, the Freeman piece did.

As for The Sanctuary - I'm tentatively interested as to whether Elcid can name the post(s) I applied for.

Alex "rest-api" Ashman

The first post was actually very neutral and asked in a discursive manner, I can't understand your "attack is the best form of defence" attitude Elcid.
With any job application, using the words tentatively interested would mean that you are not applying for work.
I can only assume Mr Ashman's interest waned.

Personally, I feel that within the Union there are plenty of opportunities to write. I don't feel the Sanctuary adds anything, I also feel that with the lack of transparency into the way the newspaper works, I don't necessarily agree that it should be allowed to use the UCL name.

Isabelle Hewitt
who has never written for any university publication, does not know Alex Ashman personally, has no idea who Farbod is, and has never applied for work at the Sanctuary and wouldn't owing to the blatant money-making scheme that it is.

Well i can only assume Isabelle has never read the Sanctuary UCL, when she expresses that she doesn't feel "the Sanctuary adds anything" to what is already there. If the old adage of 'ignorance is bliss' attitude prevails then i'd have to agree with her! The next edition of The Sanctuary UCL will come out on the 15th Jan, and the only way to know if it adds anything new/worthwhile is to grab a copy and read it all the way through, before making such assumptions. Even better, place it next to the other student papers (Pi Sq, C.G) and see if there is a clear distinction in content.

What The Sanctuary UCL represents in its very essence, is a platform for students to express the issues that matter to them. The remit is wide-ranging, and can be anything from 'UCL's latest SEX scandel' to what is going on right now in Pakistan. Surely it is wise to welcome a paper that adds something new, or even compliments the other student publications; rather then blindly dismiss it. Hey, upon release on the 15th, it might even turn out you'd receive a copy from me! :)

I am sure Alex is thankful that his editor instructed him to email one of the named in his article (though i was not contacted), since in view of the possible legal action(s) i would say it was the bext xmas present one could have asked for! Regardless, the issue has been justly resolved, and me and Mark.R (CheeseGrater Editor) were meant to meet, and probably will come the new year. This meeting will clear the air somewhat.

Let us have harmony between the papers, and no clashes of personality. Happy New Year all! :)

Elcid

Dear Elcid (aka rest-api),
I am upset by the way in which your post tries to seem acceptable by finishing off with a nice sentiment after shamelessly advertising your newspaper whilst spitting vitriol in several directions. If Isabelle doesn't feel that The Sanctuary adds anything then she has surely taken the facts into account, and an ad hominem attack on your part will not change that.

"place [The Sanctuary] next to the other student papers (Pi Sq, C.G) and see if there is a clear distinction in content."
Yep - The Sanctuary has nothing to do with UCL. Why not compare the content of London Lite and thelondonpaper(R) with Pi and CG as well?

>>>since in view of the possible legal action(s) i would say it was the bext xmas present one could have asked for!<<< - Elcid
>>>Also, I'm sorry but having read the original article you refer to (which was never going to be printed in that form anyway) there is absolutely categorically nothing illegal or defamatory about you (Elcid) in it. <<< - Sean Clothier

And finally, in the spirit of slagging someone off and then covering it up by being nice to them - Elcid, I hope you have a bloody brilliant new year and best of luck with thelondonsanctuary(R).

Alex Ashman

Dear Alex,

Of course i was not attacking Isabelle, and didn't intentionally mean to get your knickers in a twist; i was being genuinely nice in my New Year message. Maybe if you read The Sanctuary UCL, you'll realise the content is nothing like what you perceive it to be (you snidely quoted me by (A), modifying "The Sanctuary UCL" with square brackets as "[The Sanctuary]" to mislead, and (B), concluded by comparing The Sanctuary UCL to the "thelondonpaper". The only real comparison is that we hand out the paper, but in my post i was referring to "content", which is of broadsheet quality... aha! Also, you need to show more respect to the fellow students writing for it, instead of the disrespect derived from your last msg. What is behind this disrespect...? From the article you wrote about me; what do you have against me personally anyway? Do i make you angry in some way? Surely 'Ethics' is an important element to your degree!
Regardless, how about comparing the "original piece" you had written about me and my friend to the aforementioned publications... might notice a similarity or two, particularly in tabloid scaremongering or a "you're either with us or against us" (Bush) witch-hunt mentality!
I agree with Sean, and don't want this to be a forum for childish slagging matches. I will draw a line here. Please refrain from snooping on me, stay out of my personal life and don't invade my privacy ever again; and i'll stay out of your hair. I’ll carry on doing the Editing, you do the writing. My lawyer has seen all of these posts for future reference should the need arise! I will be arranging a meeting with Mark and the new editor during the New Year to clear the air, as i said before.
Finally, “in the spirit of … covering it up by being nice”, please don't take my comments personally, and let's be civilised about any future correspondence.

rest-api AKA Elcid... Happy New Year all, you inc.

Look, Elcid - I don't have any sort of vendetta against you or your organisation and I'm only replying because you keep on making all sorts of claims about me. This argument has only been personal because you made it so - in fact, the whole thing only properly started when you emailed the Editor of The Cheese Grater making all sorts of claims against me, including a claim of verbal abuse against your staff that was carefully worded so as to not specifically acuse me of such a thing.

I'm so glad you now agree with Sean, having previously ignored his advice that you had no grounds for legal proceedings. It would be helpful if you would drop the constant mention of legal proceedings - I am not in the slightest bit intimidated.

I can assure you that I have no interest in your personal life, and I am deeply upset by your continued attempts to cast me as some sort of loner who stares at your Facebook page all day - did you know that you cannot access Facebook.com from NHS computers? While I consider it quite acceptable for me to mock your humble publication (ever read Private Eye?), it is decidedly wrong of you to build a straw man of me and then attack it for a lack of ethics.

This conversation is over - thank you for your time.

Alex

Alex I hope you don't mind that I am about to carry this on.

Elcid
You assume wrong. I have read (I believe) every issue of the sanctuary thus far produced and i still do not feel it adds to UCLUs media output.
You clearly hold with the 'ignorance is bliss' attitude by assuming that I have not read any of the Sanctuary without asking. In which case you agree with my point. Good. Thank you. The Sanctuary UCL does not add anything to UCLU media societies, official or unofficial.

How did you get the position of Editor may I ask?
I assume you responded to the email sent out by the paper asking if anyone was interested and asked to be Editor. I do not hold with the 'ignorance is bliss' attitude and would appreciate if you would answer my question.

Why are people not able to write about the same things (the situation in Pakistan etc) in Pi Magazine, Newspaper, CG, LondonStudent or the wealth of departmental magazines and publications that are around?

As already proven by someone, the purpose of this paper is to make money for one person through advertising, not promote free journalism.

Do you really believe this isn't the case and if so then what proof do you have to that effect?

Isabelle Hewitt

this bloody website...

www.sanctuarynewspaper.co.uk/

www.cheesegratermagazine.org

:-P