The Glasgow Guardian’s election coverage is inappropriate

The Glasgow Guardian have interviewed members of elected student bodies for the upcoming election and their coverage has caused students to be less than impressed. Despite The Guardian’s – the national newspaper on which the university paper models itself – professional and unbiased approach to journalism, the Glasgow Guardian’s recent online articles and interviews that have been published relating to the upcoming student elections have caused a lot of annoyance and frustration due to the mocking tone adopted by the publication’s reporters, and their seemingly biased approach.

Glasgow’s election season is officially underway

The election feature that was published on their website yesterday describes candidate manifestos and is without a doubt a useful, insightful, and calculated report. However, it is hard to ignore the sarcastic and condescending tone that is obvious from start to finish. The opening of the article is quick in mentioning and patronising some of our university societies such as GUCFS, STaG and GUST, mocking them in reference to the election hustings:

‘the acting is better than in any STaG production, the drama exceeds that of any GUCFS event (or scandal), and the stock phrases and forced smiles make GUST’s homage to Girls – it’s called Lassies, geddit? – look Oscar worthy’

The notably cynical tone of this article is damaging not just on a professional level but on a personal level. For a publication that is representative of students, and particularly when discussing the elections that are important and relevant to the student body as a whole, condescending attitudes like this deliver a rather unprofessional coverage.

This feature is not the only example of GU societies and associations that have been mentioned by the Glasgow Guardian in a particularly insensitive way. In fact, there is an entire opinion piece on the publication’s website based on the university charity fashion show which was held last October, which discusses how the show was apparently more about vanity rather than charity. Not to be confused with a news article on the same subject, this article mentioned a lot of detail about the costs of the show and delivered a strong perspective, however it failed to mention the general success of the event. Once again the loud mocking tone of the feature made it hard to concentrate on the positive outcome of the charity show and the work and dedication that many individuals committed to in order to raise money for charity. By repeatedly producing imbalanced articles, the Glasgow Guardian undermines itself and burns bridges with the student body of this university.

The most recent SRC elections feature blatantly tells you who to vote for and who not to vote for. Although each manifesto is equally referred to and briefly explained, individuals have been called out for their history in leadership and are given a general thumbs up or thumbs down from the writer. Some candidates have been compared to each other and this forces anyone reading to develop a specific impression of each candidate:

‘He has missed every opportunity to allay fears over his competence, and in comparison to UnaMarie, he is surprisingly low on meaningful achievements as a sabbatical officer.’

GUU

The election articles aren’t the only thing that have caused concern for Glasgow University students as the interviews with candidates seem to deliver a similar subjective approach. There are various videos on the website of interviews with members of different student bodies that are standing in the election. One particular video that has raised a bit of frustration with GU students is the interview with Robbie Miller, GUU Honorary secretary candidate. The questions he is asked are closed off and aggressive and topics of sexism are brought up that do not help to find out more about the candidate but rather create a slightly irrelevant and manipulative topic of discussion. Throughout this interview, the fact that Miller has been an avid and vocal supporter of the recent Let’s Talk campaign since its launch is ignored, and instead he is accused of perpetuating misogyny.

Another interview with Blair Lockwood – also Honorary secretary candidate – has caused similar concern. He is rightly asked questions about his manifesto, and specifically about the proposal of drop-in sessions, however the questions are more focused on the failure of this idea rather than what it could do for students. Neither candidate is given ample space or time to answer questions, making the interview both uninformative for the student viewer, and pointlessly aggressive for the candidates.

Although student journalism ought to have an unbiased and balanced approach towards controversial issues, this particular topic has been discussed in an unfair manner. The research and facts are well executed and for many people these reports will be an enjoyable read. However, in terms of delivering an objective perspective, it could be argued that this election should be covered in a much more supportive and impartial style and I believe I speak for the student body when I suggest that it may be time for the Glasgow Guardian to rethink its approach to student journalism.