Five years ago, McGill University began live streaming its senate meetings to the university community. Students and staff use their McGill IDs and passwords to access the stream and archives. No one really cared – the university reported a peak viewership of 50 people in 2014 – but it was there, on the record, for people who wanted it.
On Jan. 19 this year I attended the St. Thomas University senate meeting to cover the discussion about possible changes to the time table, an issue that prompted 118 students to sign a petition. I borrowed a charger from one of the student senators because I needed my phone to record. I didn’t know that was unnecessary, because that night senate passed a motion to stop me from recording.
As people filed into Brian Mulroney Hall room 103 I felt a tension growing. Professors gave me sideways glances and whispered to each other. I wondered if I forgot to put a shirt on or had food on my face.
Just as the meeting started, photo editor Sherry Han snapped a few photos. Chair of the meeting, university president Dawn Russell, immediately asked her to stop and said the media presence must be addressed.
I’ve never covered a senate meeting before but I have covered city council meetings, council-in-committee meetings and student government meetings. I did not think my presence would be an issue at all. I thought surely over the years The Aquinian has attended a senate meeting or two.
Some senators mentioned feeling uncomfortable with being photographed. I respect that, and asked Han to delete the photos after the meeting. But as more senators spoke up, it became clear some people in that room did not want me there. There was talk of not wanting remarks to be misconstrued by the media. And why do they have to be here anyway? Do they know they can’t speak during the meetings?
I was simultaneously patronized and over-estimated, and I couldn’t respond.
Russell said she couldn’t ask me to leave because the meetings are open to “all members of the university community.”
One professor asked: “Are they even students?”
A motion was made to prohibit recording and photography. It passed unanimously.
I was shocked, especially since I’ve heard so much about STU’s commitment to transparency and accountability.
I took notes as fast as I could but nothing I got down was quotable. I missed many details and when I read my notes after the meeting I knew they were unreliable. I could have used them, but our first job at the student newspaper is to publish accurate stories.
Accuracy is always my first priority as editor and reporter. Without a recording I could not trust my information enough to relay to the student community. Students wanted clarity on the time table issue and I failed to deliver that as fast as possible because I could not record.
The St. Thomas University senate should be setting an example for openness and transparency, not lagging behind. For example, the University of Ottawa senate prohibits individuals from recording but an official audio recording is posted on the university’s website.
I understand senators want to have an open discussion and exchange ideas freely, and some perceive recording as a hindrance. But assuming ‘the media’ inherently misconstrues people’s words and take discussions out of context is not only incorrect but unfair as well. It’s my responsibility to portray events and people as accurately as possible.
I was taught by some of the senators in that room, and their silence and lack of support was surprising and a bit saddening. I thought important members of the university community would show more respect for student reporters and not pass a motion that stops them from doing their job correctly.
There should be a process to review the senate’s position on recording and covering the meetings. I would have no problem being part of this process, as I see myself as an advocate for the STU journalism community. My hand’s in the air. Call on me.
It’s time to set some guidelines for fairness, respect and transparency.
