Nov
26

‘It’s time to drop the parenting act and grant us some freedom’

19 Comments

EDL police Its time to drop the parenting act and grant us some freedom

Since senior tutors at the University of Central Lancashire (UCLan) sent round an email on Tuesday morning telling students to avoid demonstrations in the city centre on Saturday, there has been some debate as to whether they were right or wrong.

Saturday will see the English Defence League (EDL) protest against the development of mosques in Preston. A counter protest is also being planned by Unite Against Fascism (UAF).

Journalism students were warned that the protests would be ‘too dangerous for any student to attend or attempt to cover it’.

A number of emails followed, telling students that it was not a ‘suitable event where trainee journalists can practise their skills.’

Students were also informed that the school of journalism would not be allowing any equipment hire over the weekend.

While I can understand UCLan’s decision to warn students of the risk of injury, I can’t help but feel they’ve gone about it in totally the wrong fashion.

By telling students that they ‘have come to the conclusion that we cannot allow students to cover these events’ was wrong.

Students, particularly those in the third year of their degree – such as myself – shouldn’t be thinking twice about covering an event of this type. Throughout our degrees we have news values, and the skill of finding a story drilled into us; and yet a protest likely to receive nationwide coverage takes place on our very doorstep and we’re told we’re not allowed to attend.

While there is a chance it could turn out to be a non-event, with no drama or conflict as predicted, the opposite is just as likely.

While students are at University, they live in a bubble of comfort, rarely stepping out of their comfort zone to try new things, or to tackle situations they are unsure of. This is entirely the opposite of what University should be.

It should be a time for experimenting, learning new skills and putting them into practice in an environment where if they were to go wrong, your job will not be on the line.

Would it not have been more wise for UCLan to issue a statement warning us that the EDL/UAF demonstration may become unpleasant and that if we were to attend, we are doing so at our own risk?

Following graduation, it’s likely that a number of students will end up in desk-bound reporting jobs, unable to get out into their patch to actually report the news, to cultivate their contacts and to connect with their community – and who will be the first to moan about this? Those who didn’t bother to do so when they had the chance.

I enrolled on a journalism course because I am engrossed by news. I love consuming it and I love taking part in it.

I didn’t come to University to be told that when a potentially huge news story that I couldn’t set foot in the city centre to report on it.

As Ciaran Jones, a reporter at Media Wales so rightly put it:

Good journalism isn’t just about having a clear nose for news or a great writing style – it’s about having the knack of being in the right place at the right time, taking the opportunities that are there, and learning where the boundaries are.

How on earth will we ever learn if they don’t give us the opportunity to?

It’s time to drop the parenting act, and grant us some freedom; after all we’re paying through our noses for it.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • more Its time to drop the parenting act and grant us some freedom

tt twitter Its time to drop the parenting act and grant us some freedom Tweet This Post

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Journalism Student Journalism
19 Comments Posted by Andy Halls

19 Responses to "‘It’s time to drop the parenting act and grant us some freedom’"

  • Danny Lee says:
    November 26, 2010 at 7:47 pm

    I share your view, and other journalists alike, it is most likely to be a consenus.

    Although, they have our safety as their number one priority, this is just as risky as a warzone for a journalist, albeit far more experienced, skilled and trained.

    Nevertheless, I will do what I have to do, not recklessly but in a calm, sensible and fashioned manner that provides quality coverage, enhances my skills but puts no one, not even police, protestors or the public at risk.

  • Reni Eddo-Lodge says:
    November 26, 2010 at 7:59 pm

    Must say I agree, Andy, though not from a journalist’s perspective, although I can see where you’re coming from.
    The EDL protest to spread fear, and your university lecturers seem to be unwittingly helping their cause. We shouldn’t be scared, we should be taking a stand. I’ll be counter protesting tomorrow- hoping to God nothing violent occurs, but I’ll be damned if I sit at home twiddling my thumbs whilst the EDL spread race hate on the streets of Preston.
    If anything, we need news coverage to expose the EDL’s racist, illogical, and often contradictory arguments.

  • Daniel Bentley says:
    November 26, 2010 at 8:08 pm

    No one is stopping students from going to the event. You’re free to go but the university won’t endorse it. It’s a completely sensible response.

    The journalism department adheres to health and safety regulations. Do you think in good conscience they could sign a risk assessment form to hire out equipment?

    Journalists covering EDL events have ended up on Redwatch and with death threat emails from far right extremists. It’s just not worth it for them to endorse any student going. By hiring out equipment and allowing you to use the EDL demo as a story for assessed work, they are in effect endorsing it.

    They could easily be sued for corporate negligence if a student acting in a university capacity was injured.

  • Emily Davies says:
    November 26, 2010 at 8:47 pm

    It’s a tricky situation, but sadly even though we have all paid alot for three years of training you only learn to be a true journalist when you get a job and you’re out on your own and don’t have to worry about bringing your company/institution into disripute.

    UCLan are covering their backs and they have to because it looks bad for them to support you and 100+ student journalists is a health and safety nightmare.

    My advice is go there, experience it and if you want to report it through a blog if UCLan won’t let you through Pluto or coursework. But whatever you do, put your safety first because no story is worth getting injured or worse and most news companies would say the same.

  • The Student says:
    November 26, 2010 at 9:58 pm

    The idea that any story is too dangerous is just ridiculous. If that was taken as a rule of thumb, there wouldn’t be any war reporting and there wouldn’t ever be any investigative stories. The university should have advised ways in which to be more safe whilst covering the event, rather than rule it out completely.

    Plus, don’t know about anyone else, but (in a stubborn and perhaps immature way) being told by the university that I shouldn’t go would only make me want to go even more…

  • Jamie Smith says:
    November 26, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    Agree with your sentiment, Andy. Can understand the university’s point of view but there’s no way they should dissuade students from covering the event, even if they want to distance themselves from it. Sounds heavy-handed to me.

  • Mike Morrison says:
    November 26, 2010 at 11:34 pm

    It’s ridiculous. At 23 I thought I’d just missed the political-correct, better-not-leave-the-house approach to life that young(ish) people are having drilled into them; obviously not.

    I’m a trainee journalist so if I didn’t attend something that is so newsworthy tomorrow, I should just give up now. I don’t want to just sit and rewrite an article for a student newspaper, I want to get in the thick of the action and contribute my own findings to the ‘news pool’! And I’d be interested to know how many of the lecturers who have spent a long time being a journalist would have stayed away themselves?

    No, I don’t want to get hurt tomorrow and I’ll be doing my utmost to avoid any trouble, but I’m going to be there no matter what the University says. I wouldn’t be a journalist otherwise.

  • Daniel Bentley says:
    November 27, 2010 at 12:31 am

    Andy has failed to mention the part of the email which says the BBC will be covering the event with ex-military bodyguards. Not to mention the BBC journalists will be covered by corporate insurance and be NUJ members and have the rights and protection afforded to them.

    The Student makes a ridiculous point. There are plenty of stories too dangerous for student journalists to cover. In addition to not loaning out equipment for this EDL demo the University of Central Lancashire does not endorse students going undercover in the Manchester gang underworld and reporting from Basra.

    I reiterate. No student of UCLan is banned from attending the EDL/UAF demos. The emails we received do not say this. They merely say journalism students are prevented from reporting on it for coursework. They are not prevented from independent reportage such as what Andy is doing for Blog Preston.

  • The Intern says:
    November 27, 2010 at 12:38 am

    Just wanted to echo what others have said. While I can see why the University cannot endorse the event or hire out equipment, there should have been advice available for those that want to get involved.

    The bubble problem is huge, whether from ‘danger’ or just real life and if you were properly exposed at uni (bit by bit) within the safety net of being at uni, then you would be that bit readier for the ‘real world’.

    It doesn’t work that the day before you graduate a protest is too risky and the day after it’s fair game, surely part of being a good journalist is making judgement calls. You can’t learn how to make good calls without making a few bad ones.

    (not that attending is inherently a ‘bad’ call – just that it does have its risks)

  • Mark Roberts says:
    November 27, 2010 at 1:29 am

    I love a good story as much as anyone else but what we’ve got here is a non-starter.

    The University have made it clear that they cannot, for obvious reasons, endorse our attendance at the protests. Legally, the acceptance of material from the march as coursework or the hiring of university equipment would constitute ‘endorsement’, so these have been forbidden.

    The emails didn’t say students weren’t allowed to go to the march; they merely stated that they would not endorse their attendance as students of the University Journalism School. Nobody is trying to stop BlogPreston or any other news site from covering the events.

    After all, I think Delwyn has significantly better things to do with his weekend than check up on our sad lives and, more importantly, our tutors recognize the fact that this is a massive story and anyone who is serious about journalism will be there.

    Coincidentally, I’ll be watching the miracle of love unfold at a wedding in Hesketh Bank, so I will miss the drama. By drama, I mean two gangs of equally bullish, deluded people shouting at each other from behind a wall of police.

  • Joseph Stashko says:
    November 27, 2010 at 1:30 am

    Interesting points made by everyone here. Would just like to reiterate what Dan said, which is at no point did the university ban students from going. They simply said it wouldn’t be permissible to go under the university’s umbrella. This makes sense not only from an equipment perspective but also from a safety/respsonsibility point of view. This isn’t a City MA course with potentially much more mature students, this is an undergrad course that has people starting as young as 17/18 in some cases. For people still getting to grips with a journalism it’s more than just a trial by fire, it’d be foolish to let them go.

    That said, I’ll be covering it tomorrow for Blog Preston.

  • Lara O'Reilly says:
    November 30, 2010 at 10:55 pm

    I’m not here to debate with the points made in the comments, I’m merely here to add a little insight.

    Last year, my fellow editor at The River went undercover with the EDL at a Manchester march for an investigative journalism piece.

    His story is here: http://callumhornigold.wordpress.com/undercover-feature-edl-the-evil-face-of-extremism/

    Just check the comments.

    I’m not saying these people are above the law or that we should be rightfully scared of such idle threats (Nothing has happened to him since *touches wood a million times as he’s a good friend*), but these guys are a scary group of people to get involved with and to criticise.

    But ultimately it’s your choice whether you decide to go and report on it – not the university’s. They could have worded their warning a little better, but even they know you’re still free to do what you like.

  • Lara O'Reilly says:
    November 30, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    Right, now I look like a bloody idiot; he’s deleted the comments because they were abusive. But I think his story says enough.

  • Andy Halls says:
    November 30, 2010 at 11:59 pm

    Dan, throughout each of your comments you insinuate that in my post I claim the university is ‘stopping’ students from going, or was ‘banning’ them from doing so.

    I do not mention this in my post; the closest I came was this sentence: “I didn’t come to University to be told that when a potentially huge news story that I couldn’t set foot in the city centre to report on it,” which was a paraphrase of the comment “we have come to the conclusion that we cannot allow students to cover these events”; a statement made in the memo sent round to all students.

    The university claimed that an ‘industry contact’ had told them that they were heading down with three ‘ex-military bodyguards’, yet on the day these people failed to fabricate.

    At the protest, I bumped into both the ITV and BBC crew, who were armed only with cameras and cameraman; no Steven Seagal in sight.

    I also bumped into Ben Robinson, a reporter for the Lancashire Evening Post, and what was he armed with? Just a notepad full of shorthand, and a mobile phone.

    Yes, these are all examples of experienced individuals who have probably seen this situation a million times before, but they didn’t require the type of protection the University had suggested they would, and arguably neither did we.

    I too am an NUJ member, so do I too have the rights and protection afforded to me?

    I respect the fact that you felt that my decision to send journalism.co.uk the memo sent round to students was wrong, but I disagree.

    You accuse me of ‘obscuring facts’ yet by supplying Laura Oliver with the email, I was doing exactly the opposite; I gave her every bit of information I had at my disposal.

    You also claim it is ‘bad form’ to criticise the university publicly, and that by doing so I have brought the ‘department into disrepute’; again I would disagree.

    I am fully entitled to comment on and debate decisions made by the University; after all I am a paying customer of their services. If I was to go to HMV, buy a CD and be dissatisfied with their service, would I not be allowed to blog about it?

    Apologies for the slow reply, by the way, I’ve been very busy with third-year University work as I’ve had to hand in a portfolio worth a large percentage of my final grade.

    I hope I’ve helped clear up any of your issues there, Dan, feel free to send any more questions my way.

    Cheers,
    Andy

  • Daniel Bentley says:
    December 1, 2010 at 12:28 am

    I reiterated that no student was banned from attending in relation to some of the feedback you’ve received.

    Whether or not the BBC had minders on the day is not the point. This wasn’t mentioned by journalism.co.uk or yourself. The university received that info from the BBC in good faith.

    I have more right to take issue with the ban on coursework than most. I pitched this story for a module assessment two weeks prior to the demo. Only days before the demo was I told it couldn’t be covered. This was after I had arranged interviews and done plenty of background research. The result was that I was able to do the story as long as I didn’t attend the demo. It might seem ludicrous, and though I’d have loved to have gone, I respect the university’s decision completely.

    This was no place for a novice journalist. Fireworks were thrown at you and your colleagues. Had you been there for a course story and had you been injured as a result, the university would have been liable.

    This is not to mention the other potential threats. It’s not out of the realms of possibility that students may have appeared on Redwatch and can I link you to this article from the NUJ which states that some journalists have received death threats following EDL coverage. http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=1406

    Only through the commendable efforts of the Lancashire police did we not see a repeat of previous EDL marches with violence.

    The university acted in the capacity of an editor. An editor tells you which stories you can and can’t do, and would never send a trainee to cover this story.

    Fair play to yourself and the others who covered the even for Blog Preston, you did some good stuff.

    I do believe it’s bad form to criticise the university publicly as I do not see a positive outcome from it. Is this to influence university policy? If so, then that’s what course rep meetings are for. Had you been rebuffed by the dept then I could understand taking it public. But as such I believe it only portrays a great journalism dept inaccurately and unfavourably. Reputational damage to a dept is passed on to its students.

  • Andy Halls says:
    December 1, 2010 at 12:48 am

    The fact that the BBC’s minders was not mentioned on journalism.co.uk is definitely not my issue, I don’t have any editorial control over what goes on there.

    Also, I didn’t feel it was necessary to put it in my blogpost, as I assumed the University would’ve been sensationalising things as it sometimes has a tendency to do.

    I can understand that it must have been frustrating for you given the fact you had planned to cover it, but I’d assume you would’ve had a plan B in place, so this wouldn’t have been a massive loss.

    One issue I do have with some of your research is parading as someone who writes for Blog Preston, in this post on pne-online.net http://www.pne-online.net/forum/showthread.php?57858-EDL-March-in-Preston-27th-November/page29, you claim to be writing about the demos for Blog Preston – as far as I know, you never had any intention to write it for the site, do correct me if I’m wrong.

    I’d also like to know, why didn’t you then attend in a separate capacity? If you couldn’t have gone because the University told you it was not suitable for coursework, and seeing as you would ‘have loved to have gone’, why didn’t you?

    Fireworks were not thrown AT my colleagues, when fireworks went off they came in our direction. While there is still serious risk one of us could have been hurt, I just thought I’d make the point that we weren’t targeted.

    You claim this was ‘no place for a novice journalist’ and perhaps in some respects you’re right. But the only way to make a step up from being a novice journalist is to get experience; experiences you won’t find sat re-writing press releases, or chasing stories for portfolios.

    Another reason why I’d disagree with your point is the fact that our output was of a high standard. This is not just a personal view, this is a view that is shared with numerous other journalists, including many from the national, regional and hyperlocal media.

    While I was more than aware that my face could appear on Redwatch and other sites, I weighed up the options and decided that I was willing to take the risk. I decided that this was a fantastic opportunity to showcase both my own, and my colleagues skills, and I’d like to think we proved that. Those who don’t take risks here and there will get nowhere at all.

    In terms of your point on ‘influencing university policy’; this was not what I was trying to do. I was merely making my point, and putting my point of view across which, by and large, has been accepted by most.

    I spoke to one of my tutors, who I won’t name, and I was systematically told to stay away from the protests. I’d argue this counts as being ‘rebuffed’ by the University.
    This was enough for me to then have the fuel to air my views on the matter, and I did.

    Indeed, reputational damage to a department could be passed to its students, but for those who bothered to get out there and take a risk and do some real journalism, the by-lines and reputation they receive from doing so will counteract any reputational damage that may have occurred.

  • Daniel Bentley says:
    December 1, 2010 at 1:57 am

    On the blogpreston point there was an agreement in place with Jo and myself that we would share content. Blogpreston are welcome to use some of the content I’ve produced just as they have in the past with a number of things Tweetup/Beer Festival/General Elections. I used my blogpreston “credentials” as to avoid presenting myself as a student on a football forum. It was an angle I decided against pursuing. If you and the other editors of blogpreston have a problem with me doing this then I will cease to.

    I completely agree that you had a right to cover it and it’s great that went out and did it for yourself. Calculated risks are part of journalism. My issue is that the university were also well right to dissuade students from going.

    There would have been no way for me to attend in another capacity. If I was there I would have contravened an agreement I reached with a tutor as to how I’d cover the story. I am still covering the story. It would have been nice to go but it’s a limitation I have to work around.

    “Another reason why I’d disagree with your point is the fact that our output was of a high standard. This is not just a personal view, this is a view that is shared with numerous other journalists, including many from the national, regional and hyperlocal media.” – What point does this disagree with? I applauded yours and others efforts.

    “Fireworks were not thrown AT my colleagues, when fireworks went off they came in our direction. While there is still serious risk one of us could have been hurt, I just thought I’d make the point that we weren’t targeted.” – Completely irrelevant in terms of liability and injury.

    If you were injured, for whatever reason, and had been there with university equipment for portfolio work, it would have been negligent on the part of the university. I don’t necessarily agree with these aspects of corporate negligence law, but it exists. To this extent the university has few options.

  • Laura Oliver says:
    December 1, 2010 at 11:35 am

    Hello all,

    Really enjoying the debate on this issue. Just wanted to add that I didn’t report the University’s claims in its email that there would be a BBC cameraman with extra security cover as I wasn’t able to independently confirm this.

  • Reni Eddo-Lodge says:
    December 2, 2010 at 11:17 am

    Hate to be pedantic, but some comments insinuate that UCLan stops journo students covering the march for student media- this is incorrect. UCLan’s student media stands independently from the university and it’s lecturers. It also stands independently from the student union. But, this is to an extent, as the student union funds student media.
    The student union has a no platform policy against racists and fascists. It was introduced a few years ago and still stands. ‘The student union has a responsibility to ensure that its members feel safe in the union and not threatened by anyone else owing to their age, gender, disability, ethic or racial origin, religion, sexual orientation…etc’.
    This means that no interviews with EDL or BNP members can be included in student media. I have a copy of this motion if anyone wants to look at it.
    So, any gripes from student journos who were hoping to cover the march for student media are pointless. As stipulated in many comments before this one, it was up to the individual if they wanted to cover this independently, but none of that coverage is going in student media.

Leave a Comment