The Manitoban, the University of Manitoba’s (U of M) student newspaper, is back to regular operations after motions were raised about the paper’s funding—including a motion for a referendum to defund the paper raised by University of Manitoba Students’ Union (UMSU) councillor Cole Parsons.
The first motion came in January after an opinion piece was published criticizing the UMSU’s decision to hold a non-binding referendum on withdrawing its membership from the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS).
“That one came out of nowhere,” Manitoban editor-in-chief Garrett Williams said. “It was super surprising and we were really upset.”
He said part of the surprise came as a result of the relationship the paper has with the union.
“We have a respectful relationship I think with council, especially executives,” Williams said. “It’s adversarial at times obviously, but we can have those discussions.”
The column criticized the personal politics behind the referendum, according to Williams.
“Our student union and [the] CFS have kind of an absurd relationship throughout the past few years . . . on both sides,” he said.
Williams said he opposed the validity of Parson’s motion, and pointed out it didn’t come from the leadership or the executives, but one single person.
“The motion to defund us [was] basically saying that we were trying to force the student body to vote one way, which is nonsense,” he said.
Since the Manitoban is funded through a student levy, the proposed motion would have put an end to the funding.
While the motion was later withdrawn from the agenda, another motion at the next council meeting raised the notion of making an opt-out option for the paper’s levy available.
The motion is still ongoing, as Williams said there’s a valid discussion to be had.
However, Williams criticized Parson’s motion as he called it “an absurd response to an opinion you disagree with.”
“If you are under this cloud that anything you publish that’s negative of a certain set of council . . . it makes it hard to be honest in what your opinions are and what you’re doing,” he explained.
Williams also cited Parson’s misunderstanding of the role of editorials.
“I think that’s one of the most important things about it . . . we can actually express thoughts on what’s going on on campus,” he continued. “Nobody else is writing about that for the most part.”
Williams added that the motion represented a challenge to journalism.
“I would say that’s a direct attack on the freedom of the press, at least on the U of M campus,” he said.
However, he said there has been a lot of support from local media and student newspapers nationwide. He pointed to the fact that the first motion was withdrawn as a sign “the majority of the public supporters were on our side.”
One of the issues that arose as a result of the motion was that the Manitoban had to focus on the paper’s future rather than covering important stories, according to Williams.
“We ran column pieces about why the paper is crucial, I think, not doing what is is our chief function, which is reporting,” he said, adding that “reporting on ourselves . . . is a disappointing situation.”
The Manitoban is now back to covering stories with an eye towards the future.
“It’s kind of trying to turn it around and use it as motivation to do even stronger work because obviously, having a bit of an impact and people are looking for us to do that,” Williams said. “We want to make sure we follow through.”
Photo by Valentina Figureora
