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!
Editor’s note:
The Towerlight reported on the SGA’s “substantial achievements or pitfalls” in the following articles:
“TU discount cards coming: SGA creating way for students to save at local shops” (Oct. 12, 2011)
“SGA supports alcohol amnesty” (Nov. 13, 2011)
“SGA to make TU ‘Rate My Professor’” (Feb. 27, 2012)
“SGA confronted about reaction to hate, bias” (March 29, 2012)
“Student groups displeased with renting prices” (April 11, 2012)
“International flags to be placed around Burdick: TU to become host of 106 flags” (April 18, 2011)
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
I love how you get the last word in by including all your little articles at the end, when really you could have just admitted to yourselves (as “real journalists” would) that you did indeed print a crappy article concerning the State of the SGA speech. You don’t have to like the SGA or Matt, but as editor in chief, it seems negligent that you would accept an article about a speech by the SGA president which only includes one quote from him and minimal information about the event. How could that possibly portray the event accurately in the minds of your readers? You constantly tout the TL’s journalistic integrity and ability to “get the facts” or whatnot, but you REALLY don’t take criticism well and it’s a major flaw with your paper.
As “real journalists”, your editor’s note at the end of this article (if you did feel the need to even have one) would have said:
“You’re right. The Towerlight strives to give an accurate portrayal of events to our readers and in this instance we did not succeed in doing that.”
Instead, you’ve gone the petty route and “proved him wrong” by getting the last word in. Good job, Towerlight.
No one give a shit about the State of the SGA. People give a shit about doing laundry via their OneCard. #writeforyouraudience
Get over yourself, Sikorski. You’re nowhere near as important or influential as you think you are. You’ve had a reputation for being a self-important douche for years and this is only contributing to that.
If being passionate about your school and the students you represent constitutes you as a douche, then I’m proud to be a douche. If inspiring others and creating change constitutes you as a douche, then call me a douche.
Student leaders aren’t trying to change the world, they’re just trying to make Towson a little bit better than it was when they got here.
“Let’s have a toast for the douche bags.”
Maybe there’d be more to report about from the speech if the current SGA wasn’t grossly out of touch with the student population.
Leave your response!
Year In Review 2012-2013
The Towerlight in Print
Categories
Weather
Archive
Resources
First Class Chauffeured Washington DC Limousine Service
Recent Comments
recent articles
Links
Sections