Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Voice Forced Out of Office

Hoya Staff Writer

Published: Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Updated: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 18:09

The Georgetown Voice has been ordered by the Center for Student Programs to vacate their office by Oct. 3 and move into a significantly smaller space after three students affiliated with the newsmagazine recently damaged neighboring Leavey Center offices.

Citing violations of the Student Organization Office Use Agreement, CSP instructed the leadership of the student-run publication to pack up their equipment and head down the hall to Leavey 424, effectively swapping offices with Georgetown University Debate.

The sanction comes after two Voice staffers, Sam Buckley (COL '14) and John Flanagan (SFS '14), along with former Voice staffer Eric Pilch (COL '12), allegedly destroyed a significant portion of The Voice's ceiling while trying to evade Department of Public Safety officers on Aug. 28. The trio, who allegedly crawled through the ceiling into nearby offices of the fourth floor of Leavey, have been charged with misdemeanors for destruction of property under $1,000. Their first court hearing is Wednesday.

In all, damage to a large number of ceiling tiles and the infrastructure of the surrounding offices as well as The Voice's space caused over $4,000 worth of repairs.

Flanagan is currently recovering from back and leg injuries after exiting through a fourth-floor window while trying to elude DPS personnel; he and Buckley have since been dismissed from The Voice staff.

According to Erika Cohen-Derr, the director of CSP, every student group is able to apply for space at the end of the school year. She declined to comment on The Voice's ability to regain their old space.

Further repercussions are possible for the publication. Cohen-Derr said that groups affected by the damage — including The Hoya and the debate team — could choose to file a complaint based on a violation of the Student Organization Standards.

Tim Shine, (MSB '12), editor-in-chief of The Voice, is petitioning Associate Vice President for Student Affairs Jeanne Lord to repeal the penalty.

"In the short term, we will still be able to get a paper out. … But I don't know that in the long run it'll have the same quality as years past," Shine said.

While he does not currently anticipate that the room change will affect the size or schedule of the newsmagazine, it will greatly alter the publication's production schedule. According to Shine, the current numbers of 25 to 30 people who come to the office to put out an issue once per week will not be able to fit in the smaller space.

"The impact in the long run will inhibit our ability to retain and develop a large staff of writers and photographers," Shine said.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

9 comments

Anonymous
Wed Sep 21 2011 12:19
First, it does seem like a rather harsh punishment for the idiotic actions of three people. That said, a group that is given a privilege (here, the right to access a locked office) should be forced to make sure its members do not abuse the privilege. In the future, I'm sure all student groups with a similar privilege will think more seriously about who gets a key or the code to the office.
Second, does a weekly "newsmagazine" need 25-30 staffers in the office at a time while they put together an issue? It seems like half of the Voice (and most of the value they add to journalism on campus) is the blog, which I imagine bloggers produce from their laptops anywhere on campus. If they need to be in the office, do you need 25-30 people to blog, edit stories, edit photos, and lay out an issue all at once?
Eileen
Wed Sep 21 2011 10:08
Thanks for the clarification, Chris. Basically amounts to the same thing, though: inappropriate use of student space, as you point out. What would you have the university do? Appointing as the group's adviser a university staff member who would be the only one with access to the room (or granting a code only to the editor-in-chief and holding him personally responsible for anything that happens in the room), thereby ensuring that no one is in the office without oversight would probably be the punishment most appropriate to a "misuse of student space" charge.
typical
Wed Sep 21 2011 01:30
The cynic in me says that CSP is using this as an opportunity to get better space for their own staff. Debate has a dedicated paid staff member as a coach. The Voice does not.

I've been in the Voice office during production. Every space is used. I have no idea how they are going to publish a paper of equal quality (good or bad).

This punishment does not pass the smell test.

Re: Anonymous
Wed Sep 21 2011 00:11
Anonymous, you are way off base. In the wake of the April Fool's controversy, the university banned the Hoya from going independent, which it was weeks away from doing after years if not decades of trying to (this comment box won't let me link to an article about this, but you can look it up if you don't trust me). I think that's a little bit more than a "dialogue and a stern talking to".
Anonymous
Tue Sep 20 2011 23:39
There are two main things about this news that really bothered me...

First of all, this punishment doesn't just affect a student organization. It delivers a hit to journalism at Georgetown as a whole. Sure, having rival newspapers created a sometimes annoying and competitive atmosphere between students, but having those options available serves a much larger purpose. Without a journalism major available, newspapers on campus are the main avenues for students to explore the field and to gain experience for future careers. If anything, Georgetown should be trying to improve the newspapers on campus, not downsize or downgrade them because to do so really hurts prospective students just as much as it does current students. The unfortunate decisions of three students shouldn't result in a such a blow to what little Georgetown has of a journalism program for future generations.

Secondly, it breaks my heart a little bit that these are the consequences of a scandal that has nothing to do with journalism and nothing to do with the Voice as an entire organization when not too long ago, and another newspaper can publish an entire issue with extremely offensive content and just receive dialogue and a stern talking to (which would have been much more appropriate in this situation if the ENTIRE paper is to be dealt with as the result of the actions of just a few). This isn't to blame the Hoya for anything--I think both newspapers are great. It's just to provide another example of how college students can make dumb decisions, but that doesn't mean that people who had nothing to do with those decisions must be punished along with them.

@Eileen (CH again)
Tue Sep 20 2011 23:38
The office doesn't have keys, it has a key code. If things haven't changed since I was there -- and it's only been a few months -- every section editor was given the code with the explicit understanding that they only go into the office when appropriate. I think it's fair to say this was far from appropriate.

The space issue is important not by each club's value -- I'm sure the debate team is awesome -- but because the space is needed for what the club does. I remember an awful lot of production nights where the room was packed with students; in a smaller space, that means that a lot of people will have to be forced out of the process. Unless if the debate team sees some immediate need for all that extra space, it's strictly discipline against the Voice.

And again, the Voice should face some kind of punishment. Their reporters clearly demonstrated a lack of judgement that reflects what their editors -- including, at one time, myself -- failed to teach them. But it should be some kind of institutional reform, not a restrictive penalty that doesn't address the problem.

Eileen Nguyen
Tue Sep 20 2011 23:13
Could someone clarify something for me? These three students entered the Voice office with keys provided to them by the Voice, yes? If I'm misreading the situation and they forced entry, then never mind; the Voice isn't responsible for their actions. But if the Voice entrusted these three with keys to their office, which is after all university property, then I think that the Voice, as a whole, is at least partially responsible for these students' actions.

And, to be honest, this punishment doesn't sound all that bad. The Voice isn't being shut down or de-funded. It's not being denied student space. It's just being asked to trade space with another group (and if the space is that much smaller, I'd question the fairness about the allocation of student space to begin with - why is the debate team less important than the Voice? doesn't it deserve a nice office just as much? - but the issue of student space is a whole other problem). Maybe the Voice will have to make adjustments due to a decreased amount of space, but given that it demonstrated such a lack of judgment that it gave keys to three people who used its office to avoid DPS officers, then climbed into the ceiling and finally jumped out the window, that might not be the worst idea.

Non-affiliated Alumn
Tue Sep 20 2011 22:33
Got to love collective punishment. Students (including non-affiliated students) should organize a sit-in. Maybe get some faculty to join
Chris Heller
Tue Sep 20 2011 22:26
I spent the better part of three years in that office -- for all intents and purposes, it was my college. So I'm biased, but I think I have a good take to add here. The fact that the Voice's office is being taken away is not only irrational, but incredibly ill-advised. Why blame a collective body of a few dozen students for the actions of three? Why make it more difficult for those students to do what they love? Why hand down a punishment with such repercussive effects without any public justification?

I'm not saying the Voice shouldn't have to face some serious questions right now -- mainly about reporting ethics and more so, you know, about how the hell anybody thought it was a good idea to run away from DPS and climb through ceilings -- but that in no way gives Georgetown's administration carte blanche to wipe out something so important to so many students. This decision undermines any serious attempt to address any problems that could've been addressed. It's going after a blemish with a claw hammer.

And here's where I put that snotty part nobody wants to read about never donating to Georgetown again. Whine whine whine.





log out