A group of York students has won the opportunity to have their very own I-phone application developed after winning The App Challenge final, held at the Ron Cooke Hub on Wednesday, January 18.
YUSU Welfare officer Bob Hughes has warned students to be vigilant after a student loans phishing scam has been revealed.
Her Majesty the Queen will be visiting York on Maundy Thursday, 5th April, as part of the 800th anniversary of York’s Charter for the traditional “Royal Maundy” ceremony.
A flood caused by a heating system “failure” forced the university IT services to shut down many essential systems on Sunday night, causing problems for many students on the eve of their exams and assignment due-dates.
At least one of Vision's articles in Tuesday's edition breached the charter. Vision Co-Editor Joe Burnham described the offending articles as "contentious".
Following the printing and distribution of this week's edition, YUSU officers attempted to remove all copies from campus. However, some copies were picked up by students before the ban was implemented.
Burnham told The Yorker: “We will be distributing an edited version in a couple of days... hopefully in time for the weekend.” He went on to say that, “we are always proud of our writers and it is fundamental that their work is appreciated".
The majority of the paper will remain the same. Certain parts will however have to be edited or cut out entirely so as to comply with the media charter.
Although YUSU checks all news, comment and sports articles before Vision is published, other sections are not reviewed for libel or student welfare breaches.
Burnham stressed that Vision is “well aware that we made a mistake and we will be issuing an apology soon". Whether any disciplinary actions will be taken is as yet undecided.
YUSU declined to comment on the situation. Legal advice is believed to be have been sought with regards to at least one of the articles in one of the unchecked sections.
The issue of printing costs and the impact on Vision's funds have not yet been discussed.
Firstly, having read an uneditted copy of Vision when it first came out I was appalled not only by the offending article (a round up of college chairs year in power) that was offensive, rude and just plain misleading, but poor the quality of editting in general. A ridiculous amount of typos, tenses used wrongly, a confusion of their/there and articles finishing midway through sentences were littered throughout the copy.
For a paper that claims in its editorial that York has the best student media in the country I hope they are not referring to themselves because if so I'd hate to see the quality of publications elsewhere.
#20, I agree with #18 in the sense that YUSU don't get credit for their hard work.
I'm not sure what you mean with the bar, surely its not a one persons idea or project but something that students support in general as well as through the motion that was passed? I see why people do as well, with at least 1500 undergraduates, and maybe more in one terms time, that don't have their own place where they can hang out and drink at the same time. If I was one of them I would think the idea was great for me.
Its too easy to just point fingers at YUSU and say that they are not good, most times, if not all, I think that what people actually say when they try to take a dig is BS.
Its just too popular and easy a thing, especially anonymously, to say that YUSU is shit.
Regardless of the actual purpose of the offending articles, I believe vision should have been withdrawn on the grounds of poor spelling, grammar, editing, proof reading and sentence construction.
Vision's a good read and quite funny in places and I'm glad they dare to be controversial in a tabloid manner...but c'mon, you're at university, LEARN TO SPELL!!!
I've got a copy of the unedited Vision and genuinely can't see anything (in terms of content) that justified the hysteria. Is it true the James chair threatened to sue YUSU? And did Vision actually accuse her of anything that wasn't true?!?!
If you're going to run for any elected office, expect criticism.
Every time a paper calls gordon brown a disgrace, or reckless, or boring, and every time a paper calls david cameron a toff we don't see people getting hysterical about their 'welfare'.
It goes with the job. Sorry guys, but unless there were any explicit lies in the article then i can't see any grounds for withdrawal. (i've read it). It's not nice at all, but thats the nature of elections - some people won't like you and some will. Thats for the electorate to decide.
I wonder if similar 'welfare' protection will be extended to the senior management team every time they get it in the neck for disagreeing with this bar idea.
If you can stand for parliament at 18 and be expected to deal with the media, surely the same should go for a student union officer.
#25, I dont agree, standing for office in parliment is slightly different than helping out your mates at uni.
I dont think that someone should be able to be just lay into people they dont like (and people here is people, we are all just students) in a way that (a) everyone pays for and (b) loads of people read.
Its not beneficial to anyone and I'm happy there is something in place that can protect the money that is put in on my behalf against that kind of harsh/unnnecessary/untrue/counterproductive/stupid use.
anyways, Vision guys agreed that it was too much.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report