SGA president upset over coverage
I read last Monday’s (April 16) Towerlight with a bit of confusion and frustration.
Although I am always appreciative when The Towerlight decides to give the Student Government Association coverage, I could not grasp why Lauren Slavin decided for her reporter to write solely on a single initiative of which I spent no more than 11-12 seconds addressing in a 35-minute speech.
On Thursday, April 12, I gave a State of the SGA Address, where I described, in detail, the initiatives that the incoming executive board promised to accomplish, as well as what we have actually accomplished.
I also elaborated on projects we are still working on, new ideas/initiatives that were not originally planned, how we spent our $1.5 million budget, and major campus concerns that were brought up throughout the year.
I feel the 10-sentence article that was written (“SGA considers OneCard laundry plan”) made it appear as if the Student Government Association had not been doing anything with their resources and time, which as discussed at the Address, is simply not true.
After a harsh editorial by Lauren Slavin, “Run a realistic campaign, SGA,” which criticized SGA executive board tickets for making “false promises,” I was hoping The Towerlight would choose to report on the substantial achievements or pitfalls of this year’s SGA that I outlined at the Address.
My speech clarified some of the concerns of which Ms. Slavin listed in her editorial.
I made sure to speak about the 24-hour library, which we discovered would cost approximately $100,000 extra a semester to do (not fiscally possible at this time).
I also discussed the promise of early and late night dining hours (Paws is in fact open until 2 a.m. now, and with the work of the University Residence Government, Einstein Bagels is open at 9 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday), as well as the campus climate initiatives that the SGA has been spearheading.
The 10,000 discount cards to local businesses, 17 Prove It fund and 36 supplemental allocations totaling over $50,000, Responsible Tiger Protocol (a medical amnesty opportunity for students), partnership with a new in-depth professor rating website (www.koofers.com), or the new international flag walkway set to be put in within three weeks, are all large scale, completed projects.
Why did the article solely focus on a single initiative currently in its planning stages?
Why not inform the student body of changes that have and are going to make a true impact on their experience at Towson?
The lack of coverage does not change the fact that those things happened, or that the SGA will continuously work its hardest for the students we represent.
I just felt the need to write in my frustrations on the choice of coverage.
Have a great last four weeks of school, and go Tigers!
The Towerlight reported on the SGA’s “substantial achievements or pitfalls” in the following articles: