Spring Break
Abstract:
The Student Government Association (SGA) at UMKC has forgotten its purpose.
During the week of April 14, students were asked to approve a revised constitution for SGA. Per the old constitution - still the governing document at the time of the vote - a new constitution would need a two-thirds majority of the voting body to be accepted....
Originally posted byGET IT RIGHT
SGA did not adopt the constitution in the meeting on April 23, 2008. The item that was voted on were the SGA Bylaws. The Senate voted on the constitution back in March to have it go to a referendum.
The resolution is simply a recommendation to the Vice Chancellor. And, the reason for that resolution overall was due to the lack of awareness made about the revised Constitution.
Is it possible for Unews to actually get all the information before they go posing their on perspective on something?
Nothing has been violated...if you understood what took place, the Constitution that was amended in 2005 is still the binding document. And the 2/3's vote is based off of the number of students who voted in the last SGA Constitution elections...if you were actually listening...you would have caught that on your little tape recorded. And, there are no records of what that number should be due to the fact that there are no records from the last election.
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
Joshua,
If you want to talk about hemorrhaging money, let's talk about the UNews.
How much does your executive staff make when combined with their scholarships? And why don't you ever write anything about that?
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
Joshua,
If you want to talk about hemorrhaging money, let's talk about the UNews.
How much does your executive staff make when combined with their scholarships? And why don't you ever write anything about that?
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
A few comments on your response:
"As news editor, I received $110/week each week we published an issue. There were no scholarships or grants involved."
Stop with the straw man argument. I never said you received a scholarship as a news editor. I said the executive positions at the paper received scholarships (in addition to a salar that certainly beats the work study pay rate).
"You should also take into account the fact that U-News is a tangible, award-winning product for which any UMKC student is welcome to write/illustrate/photograph."
Who cares what awards you win? And why would anyone want to work for your publication when it has to go through the filter of editors who have their own agendas yet try to present the paper as objective and independent.
"During my brief stint as a staffer, we never approached the SAFC for funding. In fact, the publication brought in advertising revenue."
You are absolutely wrong on this. The paper would not exist if not for the $50,000+ subsidy it receives every year from the student activity fees. The ad revenue is a moot point. If this publication had to be self-supporting, it would be out of business in 6 months.
"U-News provides a UMKC-centered forum for issues relevant to students, faculty and staff."
Facebook accomplishes the same thing at no cost to UMKC students.
"What does SGA provide that student clubs and organizations couldn't acquire on their own?"
SGA serves as the elected representative of the student body. They are accountable to students in ways that the UNews is rarely held accountable.
Your incorrect statements on all of these issues shows that the supposed "news editor" of the paper rarely even researches or honestly reports so many of the issues included in the news sections.
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
Unews editor in chief and ad managers are just two of the positions that receive scholarships. When combined with their salaries and commissions, they make more than most graduate assistants.
Did you ever think to report on the fact that both the Debate and Mock trial teams receive thousands of dollars in funding from sources no other student organization can access? You certainly never included this information in any of your news articles.
Most of your ad money comes from other campus groups. Just think how much more money they would have if you didn't charge such ridiculous prices.
The SGA is also one of the biggest advertisers with the Unviversity News. Maybe they should save students some money by stopping that practice.
Didn't the UNews plagiarist receive some awards too?
What a lawyerly response on your use of over $50,000 of Student Activity Fee funding. This is why students should be all the more upset that groups like the UNews receive $50,000 with no accountability. Just think of all the Debate and Mock Trial Teams that could be funded with that amount!
SGA is held accountable every time there are elections and whenever someone abuses their office. Wasn't the SGA President thrown out of office a few years ago?
Why the hatred against anonymous sources and writers? Journalists couldn't survive without them.
Besides, why should anyone take a person seriously who couldn't even get more than 6% in an election?
Originally posted byNo name, so just deal with it
As a former UNews staff member and editor, I think its great to see Joshua Seidon shooting down misconceptions about the paper. What's not so great, however, is his arrogance in doing so. Seidon: Do you have to resort to name calling. I.E. "coward who chooses to remain nameless" + other snide comments. In doing this you are not helping the image of the paper. You are only reinforcing what everyone already thinks about the UNews and its recent staff.
I hope that the next crop of students to carry on the paper responds to readers with a better sense of professionalism than what has been shown over the past year.
Originally posted byNo name, so just deal with it
As a former UNews staff member and editor, I think its great to see Joshua Seidon shooting down misconceptions about the paper. What's not so great, however, is his arrogance in doing so. Seidon: Do you have to resort to name calling. I.E. "coward who chooses to remain nameless" + other snide comments. In doing this you are not helping the image of the paper. You are only reinforcing what everyone already thinks about the UNews and its recent staff.
I hope that the next crop of students to carry on the paper responds to readers with a better sense of professionalism than what has been shown over the past year.
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
Seiden, you're the news editor. Why didn't you ever publish the amounts going to other clubs and organizations? All you had to do was walk over to the Student Life office to obtain that information.
I would completely disagree that the UNews serves the broadest groups of students. SGA serves far more students through the academic and fraternity councils that receive funding that touch every academic and social group on this campus. The Unews rarely (if ever) shows that depth in its reporting. Most of the news articles are centered on A&S (usually communications studies) issues, rarely highlighting anything that takes place on hospital hill. Even APC serves far more students than the UNews.
As to auditing other clubs and orgs, isn't that what the SGA just did? You're the one that didn't publish the results of the audit. All you did was try to hype some Student Privacy issue that was quickly resolved.
If Seiden is typical of UNews editors, I can see why no one wants to speak with or work at that publication.
The reason why there is a Student Life separate from SGA is that students don't select these employeees, but students can choose in how their interests are represented by SGA. The two perform completely different functions.
The reason the UNews is so critical of the SGA (unlike your treatement of most campus administrators) is that their constitution requires them to advertise with the UNews regardless how inaccurately you cover them. Removing that requirement would likely result in the UNews showing the same level of suck-up coverage for SGA that it does toward so many other administrators who control the purse strings for your publication.
I'm sorry, but the advertising and news components are not completely divided. That's simply not true. Just take a look at what shows up as an ad one week and often appears as a "news" article the following week.
You can obtain any information you want on SGA finances. All you had to do was walk over to the Student Life Office and ask for them. If they won't submit them, submit an open records request. But based on the UNews' staff unwillingness to do any real reporting (including your tenure as news editor), I doubt the UNews would be even be willing to do that.
As to the honest election question, why didn't you challenge it if it was so dishonest? Any student can do that. Once again, I guess you felt it was easier to sit back and make accusations as to actually work and overturn it if it was as dishonest as you claim.
And what kind of foolish person runs for an election without spending any money? No wonder why you received such a low tally. Someone that out of touch with political reality shouldn't be allowed near an office.
As to other SGA execs running for office without money, why didn't your much heralded news department pick up the financial disclosure reports that all candidates are required to submit? Oh wait, that would require work on your part.
Also, you criticized SGA for not bringing more people into the process. Why didn't you as news editor actually recruit some staff so someone else beside the editor could actually write the articles?
Little wonder why no one believes anything in any part of the publication
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
The UNews business manager get fired, the paper's office has an apparent asbestos problem (according to a former news editor's blog), and instead of reporting on these matters, a senior staffer of the publication criticizes commenters' grammar.
What an incredible sense of priorities.
Originally posted bySarah
SGA person: waaahh, we're important.
Seiden: wahhh, I'm important.
News flash: students couldn't care less about the SGA or the U-News. You guys just spend all your time flinging poo at each other. Both institutions are messed up and filled with insane egos (which is odd given that no one is paying attention except to shake their heads and move on with their lives).
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
I wouldn't go so far as to say the UNews is as bad as the media in Zimbabwe.
One problem with this paper is that there's little institutional memory, and as a result the same news/entertainment/sports stories are recycled every year while various changes to UMKC (funding, staffing, policy) are completely missed.
Another problem is seen by the comments of Joshua Seiden. The Unews is a closed door culture that could use more transparency and more of the staff getting outside of their office and talking with students, faculty, and community members finding out what really matters to them.
Originally posted byJoshueSeidengetsitwrong
And one more thing, when is the last time the UNews provided any critical coverage of the athletic department? Look at all the money the students contribute toward it, all the external donations that come in, all the scholarship money, all the contracts with local media affiliates, all the years without any appearances in the NCAA tournament, and the UNews continues to run nothing but scores and athlete profiles that are spoon fed to them by the sports information department.
Originally posted bySouthbound Pachyderm
Hey! You all leave Joshua Seiden alone! He is the dreamiest hunk of ex-UMKC editor that anyone could ever ask for! In regard to the relentless bickering about the SGA/U-News, the SGA is a petty group of administratively driven quasi-politicos. As a member of the audit committee in question, the student ID numbers were only released to those on the SGA. While I don't trust them politically on campus, I doubt that any of them will be committing student ID identity-theft so just let it go. Seiden was right, the issue was resolved and the comptroller was severely reprimanded. Hope this clears a few things up. Oh, and Seiden for president 2008!
GET IT RIGHT
posted 4/28/08 @ 4:59 PM CST
The resolution is simply a recommendation to the Vice Chancellor. And, the reason for that resolution overall was due to the lack of awareness made about the revised Constitution.
Is it possible for Unews to actually get all the information before they go posing their on perspective on something?
Nothing has been violated...if you understood what took place, the Constitution that was amended in 2005 is still the binding document. And the 2/3's vote is based off of the number of students who voted in the last SGA Constitution elections...if you were actually listening...you would have caught that on your little tape recorded. And, there are no records of what that number should be due to the fact that there are no records from the last election.