The Daily Californian’s V.O.I.C.E Initiative was an issue of concern among ASUC senators at their first meeting of the semester Wednesday, with representatives raising questions about how the fees will be transferred to the newspaper and the level of transparency in the process.
Because the senate was not in session over the summer, the newspaper signed an agreement with the University of California in June to transfer this semester’s funds but still needs to get senate approval of a Memorandum of Understanding for the next four and a half years.
The initiative was approved by students in the 2012 ASUC general election, requiring them to pay a $2 semesterly fee for five years to support the paper and its online presence.
The Memorandum of Understanding that will be drafted between the ASUC, the university and the newspaper will lay out what role the ASUC will play in transferring the fees to the newspaper. It became contentious last spring when senators questioned whether having the agreement between the university and the paper would compromise the paper’s editorial independence.
“I was concerned with the implications it would have on the ASUC and the independence of the Daily Cal,” Student Action Sen. Mihir Deo said in an interview. “The next step is making sure student fees are not being misused in any way.”
Daily Cal Editor in Chief and President Stephanie Baer said the ASUC would act as a third-party organization in transferring the funds between the university and the paper and maintained that the fee will not interfere with the newspaper’s editorial independence.
“We are going to require that it is clear to students that (The Daily Californian is) no longer financially independent,” ASUC President Connor Landgraf said in an interview.
Baer said the fee does not compromise the newspaper’s editorial independence.
“The way that I see it is that students are paying for a service,” Baer said at the meeting. “It is not a question of independence. It is a way to make sure we are doing our best to serve our readership.”
At the meeting, Student Action Sen. Rosemary Hua asked if a student not affiliated with The Daily Cal could serve on the senior editorial board of the paper since students will be paying to help support it.
Baer said she and Landgraf would discuss the suggestion. She also said that the newspaper will release a monthly report of major expenses on its website to ensure that any major changes with the paper are clearly visible to the public.
Contact Alyssa Neumann at [email protected]
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
“maintained that the fee will not interfere with the newspaper’s editorial independence.”
Lol, it’s like they think if they keep repeating something, it’ll magically be true.
So many problems with this. First of all the Daily Cal has never been transparent, giving misleading information to local news sources to drum up support for their own money grab, deliberately withholding information from other publications and keeping them out of the process until it was too late to stop it, all in the efforts to push this initiative through, and using a name that doesn’t even come close to accurately describing what it does. So I have no faith that their published monthly reports will offer any useful information (like how much they paid Lynn Yu as campaign manager for the V.O.I.C.E. initiative or that they refused to change the name of the initiative after it benefitted themselves only and not the “community” because they had already wasted money on flyers and signs and a ream of other expenditures that are now going to be partially paid for by students).
Also this little gem ““The way that I see it is that students are paying for a service.” is incredibly offensive. Why are students having to pay for this rag at all (especially one as low-ranked for the quality of their journalism as this one)? Student newspapers are not supposed to come with a price-they’re usually run by students for students, not by paid professionals who eat up most of the budget while the paper pretends otherwise when asked about it so they can charge everyone for something that is supposed to be free. No wonder you guys are failing miserably. What happens when this doesn’t fix your budget problems? Does the fee go up to $5? $10? How much will you need from students in the future when you still haven’t fixed things? Do you even have a plan (considering you’ve never had one beyond stealing from student coffers)?
Both The Daily Cal and the ASUC are fucking jokes. The former for trying to remain independent while taking students’ money and the latter for trying to compromise the independence of the newspaper.
There is no free lunch. We already see Rosemary Hua trying to take away the independence of the paper. Lose control of your finances, and you are no longer your own.
Why is being dependent from student fees any worse than being dependent on advertising revenue? Even assuming sources of funding influence editorial coverage, what is worse: the DailyCal trying to please students with their coverage (because students are the ones approving and paying the money via referendum, NOT the ASUC), or to please advertisers?
Notice how one ASUC senator was trying to get a person on the editorial board. That kind of involvement doesn’t happen with advertisers. Advertisers are trying to make sure the paper appeals to its customers, so there is some influence. However, the ASUC is thinking about actually participating in the editorial review. That is something that shouldn’t happen. The Daily Cal can’t be honest about ASUC activities if the ASUC has a hand in the editorial board.
This is ridiculous. The ASUC isn’t funding the DailyCal, the students are through a separate fee completely independent from the ASUC budget.
And the misrepresentation of facts just keep on coming. Where does it say the ASUC is trying to participate in editorial review? Who made this suggestion? What were their words exactly? ^This person must be an anonymous Daily Cal staffer. If so, this is pretty sad that the Daily Cal has to have employees whose function is to pretend they don’t work with the paper and post on their own comment boards to stem the tide of criticism of their operation. Hmm, student dollars hard at work I see. Bang-up job you guys are doing. Do we have another generation of Stephen Glass-like “journalists” in the ranks at the Daily Cal?
The article above had the following statement. “At the meeting, Student Action Sen. Rosemary Hua asked if a student not affiliated with The Daily Cal could serve on the senior editorial board of the paper since students will be paying to help support it.” This is a senator trying to see if the ASUC can’t have some influence on the editorial board. Then the article goes on to say that the Daily Cal and the president of the ASUC would discuss doing this.
“We are going to require that it is clear to students that (The Daily Californian is) no longer financially independent,” ASUC President Connor Landgraf said in an interview.
> If a government were to say this in the real world, they’d be accused of interfering with the press.
Wrong dimwit. the Daily Cal misrepresents itself as an independent organization run by students, when it is run by paid professionals and is now violating its own claims to never be dependent on funds from student fees in order to operate.