The room defines the station itself: edgy and eclectic—a personality that has made WUSB widely popular on campus and off.

But despite that popularity, the station is struggling. This year the Undergraduate Student Government cut WUSB’s finances by roughly $9,000, from a budget of $72,000 last year to the station’s current one of $63,000. As recently as the 2009-2010 academic year, WUSB received over $80,000, making the cuts over the past two years total about $25,000.

Davanelos, WUSB’s program director, says the cuts are detrimental to the station’s operations.

“They affect us in a whole slew of ways,” he says. “We already run on a shoestring. Cutting our funding prevents us from doing our job.”

WUSB’s budget is used to pay bills—a $1,000 monthly Verizon phone bill and a $4,500 monthly lease on a transmitter tower. Additionally, the station pays satellite fees and a fee to run its Integrated Service Digital Network line, which is used to broadcast to other stations. And because WUSB uses old equipment, including a 1967 analog board, repairs are frequent and costly, Davanelos says. He adds that deejays sometimes use their own money to replace damaged equipment.

Because WUSB does not advertise, it holds donation drives. Years ago it would receive as much as $55,000 in donations from listeners across the country. But with the slumping economy, Davanelos says, donations have dropped to around $22,000. The station used to put those donated funds towards updating equipment, but now the money is only used to pay the bills the station’s budget cannot cover.

But WUSB is not the only student media group at Stony Brook with a shrinking budget. USG cut about $66,000 from the seven funded student-run media outlets this year. Isobel Breheny-Schafer, Assistant Director for Student Media, says that for the past three years funding to student media groups has dwindled significantly, and many groups have faced problems with USG. In the 2010-2011 academic year, the Statesman, which also relies on advertising revenue, lost almost all of its funding, forcing the paper to limit its publishing from twice a week to once a week. SBU-TV, the campus-wide television station, saw its budget freeze last spring after USG took it over to refurbish it.

Breheny-Schafer says she is worried about whether or not this trend will continue.

“My concern is, if this keeps happening, then there will be no more campus journalism,” she says. “They won’t be able to cover as much campus news.”

Student media groups use their budgets differently than other funded clubs and organizations. Rather than using funds to host events or pay for trips, they use theirs strictly for operational purposes. Print publications such as the Statesman and The Press pay for camera equipment, office supplies and layout software along with printing fees every time they publish. Even online publications have to pay for domain space as well as camera equipment and office supplies.

Broadcast media groups, however, normally require higher budgets because their equipment is more expensive and they are required to pay additional fees in order to broadcast.

USG Treasurer Thomas Kirnbauer says USG did not specifically target student media outlets when forming this year’s budget.

“We do not cut clubs/organizations based on the service they provide to the campus,” he says. “Therefore, to say we are doing so or to ask if media groups will get their budget cut further is completely under false pretenses.”

But many of Breheny-Schafer’s concerns stretch beyond the funding of student media. Many of the groups’ memberships, including SBU-TV, are increasing, but budget cuts mean fewer resources will be available to students so they all can participate and voice their concerns on campus.

The assistant director says she is also concerned about the new financial bylaws, which became effective last semester. Section 118, Subsection 6 of the legislation states that every club and organization must host at least one event on campus each semester that is entirely or partly funded by the Student Activity Fee. In January, the Asian American Journal lost its budget of at least $2,800; on USG’s website Kirnbauer writes that this occurred because the group violated the bylaw. While Breheny-Schafer worries about how this will affect other student media, Kirnbauer says AAJ lost its funding because it didn’t spend any money at all.

“I interpreted the rule very, very loosely,” he says. “As long as the media groups spent some amount of money, I didn’t consider it a violation of the rules.”

But perhaps the most questionable of USG’s actions concerning student media, and the one that troubles Breheny-Schafer, is its acquisition of SBU-TV. Last spring, after SBU-TV allocated for more equipment so it could stream some of its content digitally, USG found that the station’s service was outdated. The organization passed the Reformation of SBU Television Act, acquiring the station and freezing its budget so it could not operate. The act states that USG will restructure the station, but SBU-TV President Andy Mavra says there’s been little process.

“As far as I know there has been little effort by USG in terms of trying to restructure SBU-TV,” Mavra says. “And if there have been efforts they have all been done without discussing it with the currently existing members of the club. As far as I know USG has not used our studios for anything productive or in favor of other students since they kicked us out.”

Mavra, a cinema and cultural studies major, says that any progress with the station’s reformation is thanks to members of SBU-TV. Although the station is technically still recognized as a club and still holds meetings, it has no definitive meeting space, useable budget or access to its equipment. Mavra says more people have expressed interest in helping it regain activity.

“From the time our studios got closed down SBU-TV has made it clear that we are open to the idea of change and want to work with USG to help turn SBU-TV into the more open, student-friendly organization they claimed they wanted,” he says, “But in the year that has passed little to no effort has been done to achieve that.”

“We understand that money is being cut from most clubs, especially in the media department, but our main goal is to simply get the use of our studio and already-owned equipment back,” he adds.

USG President Mark Maloof could not be reached for a comment.

Breheny-Schaefer and Davanelos, say the way USG handles Stony Brook’s student media needs to change. Both agree that USG is potentially preventing students from developing crucial job skills. Many Stony Brook alumni have gone obtained jobs at well-known, respected news media outlets because of their involvement with student-run media organizations. Scott Higham, once a writer for The Press long before the School of Journalism was established, is now a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter for The Washington Post. Shivana Harriram, the current news director at WUSB, got a job with News 12 because the station knew of the news pieces she aired.

“College is supposed to be a sandbox,” Davanelos says. “It’s supposed to provide you with real-world tools. Stuff like these budget cuts are totally [preventing that].”

The program director suggests that USG may not understand how crucial funding is to the way student media groups operate. “They’re completely ignorant,” Davanelos says. “If they weren’t ignorant, we wouldn’t be in this situation.”

“We provide a valuable service,” he continues, “They’re completely preventing that.”

The Press’ main concern with the deterioration of what once could be called a rival paper is the absence of competition. With the introduction of The Stony Brook Independent and Think Magazine, both originated from disgruntled Statesman writers, (as was The Press) one would think that competition in campus media would be at an all time high, right? Well, it’s difficult to determine which is best when you are comparing apples to oranges, pears and grapes, but when one of the more institutionalized contenders is rotten (hint: it’s The Statesman), that question becomes much easier to answer.

A good argument can be made that The Statesman deserves to be cut. There is no excuse for operating a campus newspaper with a consecutive deficit over two years that totals nearly $30,000. The excuse that advertising revenue has dropped can only go so far, at which point the editors of The Statesman should’ve realized that certain cuts would have to be made, perhaps to the number of issues they printed and the frequency.

But the bigger question at hand lies in the financial future of The Statesman and its larger impact on the campus and organizations such as The Press.

The Stateman's USG Judiciary hearing. — Photo by Roman Sheydvasser

“The USG takes no stance on the quality of a publication,” said Moiz Khan, USG Treasurer when asked about if the quality of The Statesman had factored into the decision to cut the budget. “It’s their first amendment right to print whatever they want to write. While opinions might be brought up, it would be a violation,” Khan said.

But clearly, behind closed-doors, that’s what it is. It appears that senators and officials from USG are influenced by the poor quality of The Statesman in their decision to cut their budget, despite denying such beliefs in public.

This is both dangerous and immoral. Such a precedent would threaten the sanctity of any publication on this campus, importantly to us, The Press. The problem with judging quality is that it is highly subjective—hard to reconcile with the objectivity required when allocating funds for clubs on campus. Subjections cutting the news media would impinge a publication’s right to free speech; it would be, like Khan said, a huge violation of the USG’s responsibilities and more importantly the trust of the students who pay for an activity fee. Consider how there have been numerous conversations amongst USG senators and officials over The Statesman’s lack of USG coverage—in fact a number of Senators insultingly post up the one or two articles The Statesman published on the walls in their offices—concluding that The Statesman is not doing enough.

The Statesman does have a responsibility to inform their readers, but the USG has a responsibility to respect the special protections afforded to the media and avoid a potentially self-interested budgetary process favoring groups, which publicize the USG.

The problem with judging quality is that it is highly subjective and that doesn’t bode well the attempted objectivity required when allocating funds for clubs on campus.

If The Statesman is getting cut because of their fiscal irresponsibility and failure to defend their importance on campus (their budget application and defense was inept and inadequate), then let them be cut. The $27,000 saved would probably go towards something much more beneficial anyway. But because there seems to be a strong underlying tone of complaints regarding the quality of The Statesman, there’s no question that those dealing with The Statesman’s budget, in an effort to address that tone, should make the process as transparent as possible.

And because The Statesman can’t seem to do anything right, we would offer our advice—that they start reporting on their own situation rather than leaving other publications like The Independent and The Press to report on it. Editorialize on it, protest against and get angry about it.

But again, The Statesman wouldn’t be in the position that they are in if it weren’t for the leadership.

]]> http://sbpress.com/2010/04/if-the-dumb-could-speak/feed/ 1 http://sbpress.com/2010/04/the-statesman-money-massacre/ http://sbpress.com/2010/04/the-statesman-money-massacre/#comments Thu, 22 Apr 2010 02:36:51 +0000 Najib Aminy http://www.sbpress.com/?p=3473 By Najib Aminy

Following a $29,000 operating budget deficit for the past two years, the Stony Brook Statesman’s Undergraduate Student Government budget allocation has been significantly slashed from $27,000 to $2,500.

The Statesman, founded in 1957, is the self-defined official newspaper of Stony Brook University. The paper prints twice a week, with an emphasis on hard-news and, as an incorporated non-for-profit organization, operates on a budget which has a strong dependency on advertising. However, continuing the trend seen throughout the print medium, The Statesman’s 2008-2009 ad revenue dropped 30 percent from the year prior.

And while The Statesman is not in debt, with $93,000 in total assets as of their 2008-09 financial statements, the mere fact that the organization ran a $5,000 deficit in 2007-2008, followed by a $24,000 deficit in 2008-2009, has convinced members of USG that the administration of the bi-weekly newspaper is fiscally incompetent.

“Their operational deficit seems to be a growing trend,” said Moiz Khan, Treasurer of USG. “Is it responsible to give $27,000 to a club that lost $24,000 in the previous year?” he asked. The editors of The Statesman, in response to their funding cut, filed a brief in protest to the USG Judiciary in what some Senators implied is an attempt to appeal for budget restoration. But the court’s interpretation of the case, at least according to Chief Justice Geordan Kushner, was not so much the issue of The Statesman’s budget, but about addressing whether budget hearings for USG clubs should be mandatory. (The Statesman had not attended such a meeting)

“The decision of the case wouldn’t have the influence of giving their budget back,” said Kushner. “If they are entitled to it, they can have a budget hearing again.” Kushner added that the case served more as a precedent on the status for budget hearings, which, during the hearing, Khan fully acknowledged were optional.

“While they are optional, they are important and beneficial,” Khan said. “The burden of proof is on clubs to explain why they deserve money, which is done at the budget meeting.” Khan says he received a budget application from The Statesman with a list of expenses, costs and a copy of the club’s Constitution, but with no explanation.

The proposed budget, which had allocated $2,500 to the Statesman—a 90 percent cut from their 2008-2009 USG funding of $27,000—was rescinded due to the recent closure of the Southampton campus. USG is in the process of reallocating $80,000 from the activity fees of Southampton students back into clubs at Stony Brook and into the general fund. The Statesman’s future remains unclear.

The Statesman, during their judicial case, made it clear that USG funding was used for printing and emphasized that $2,500 would not be enough to sustain their operations. However, Khan said he purposely allocated that specific figure to allow them enough money, which combined with outside revenue sources, to print a couple issues until the fall budget revision in late September of the Fall 2010 semester.

“I don’t think The Statesman have made a case foward as to why they deserve more funding, nor should they receive special treatment in which they are considered [for budget allocation] after the process is normally done,” said Khan, who is the Managing Editor of Think Magazine.

While Khan acknowledged his position with Think, he denied a suggested conflict of interest, given that Think is not funded by the USG and that the magazine publication serves a different purpose from that of The Statesman.

The situation The Statesman is in resembles that of the New York Public Interest Research Group, which had been defunded in 2008 and worked their way towards gaining back a budget of roughly $32,000.

“They will not go out of business,” said Khan, pointing to the $90,000 the organization has in assets, and the process by which they can regain their funding. “It is the duty and responsibility of that organization to prove that they deserve USG funding, and that student money is well accounted for. I don’t beleive The Statesman has made enough of an effort to do that.”

Multiple attempts were made to contact the editors of The Statesman. They would not comment.

The Press, received roughly $46,000 in its 2009-2010 budget, after Fall revisions and a $4,000 grant, which amounts to a 40 percent increase from the previous year’s budget.

Additional reporting by Bobby Holt

Stop the presses. That is what the Statesman faces in the wake of massive USG budget cuts.

The Statesman, Stony Brook University’s oldest newspaper dating back to the Oyster Bay campus in the late 1950s, is facing the biggest cut in USG funding in it’s 53 year history.

The Undergraduate Student Government budget for the 2010-2011 academic year, which was approved by the Senate Tuesday evening, reduces the Statesman’s USG line budget to $2,500 from an allocation last year of over $27,000.

That will be a steep and painful cut the paper will have to endure if they do not recoup some of the lost funding. Last year, despite substantial revenue generated from the sale of ads, the paper was operating at a $39,000 loss according to the paper’s business manager Frank D’Alessandro.

“We were operating at a loss the previous year too, but not as bad,” he said.

The cut has Statesman Editor-in-Chief April Warren and the rest of the student staff questioning how to further cut costs and minimize the damage.

“The Statesman has been looking into going weekly,” said Warren. “We’ve asked Frank [D’Alessandro] to crunch the numbers.”  The paper currently puts out two issues per week.

Reducing the frequency of publication would be just the latest in a series cost cutting maneuvers for the Statesman. In the last year, the paper reduced the circulation of each issue by 1000 copies, they eliminated their paid advertising staff position, D’Alessandro took a pay cut, and expenses like travel costs that had previously been covered by the paper now must be paid out of pocket by the student editors and writers.

But the USG argues that even with little or no funding from student activities fees, the paper should be able to put out a quality paper at least once a week.

“If the Press can operate with $40,000 every other week, the Statesman should be able to get by with $80,000,” the approximate amount generated by advertising each year, said one USG source who is familiar with the budget process but wished to remain anonymous because the budget is not yet finalized.

Other campus publications like The Press and The Patriot were granted budgets at the same level or slightly higher than this year’s. And the online news site The Independent is seeking USG funding for the first time. Think Magazine does not currently receive USG funding.

“The fact that they are unable to function properly means they haven’t done a good job managing their money,” the USG official continued.

The cut may have been particularly severe because The Statesman failed to schedule a budget hearing, which would have allowed the staff to explain their financial situation to a member of the USG budget committee in person.

“That was a huge oversight on our part,” admitted Warren.

But one USG representative, again wishing to remain nameless until everything was finalized, cited that as an example of a feeling of entitlement.

And what about rape and incest? This thing has all the pseudo-scientific answers you crave!

The“iCare” advertising supplement that was in the October 8 issue of The Statesman has circulated through campus stirring controversy along the way. Many have expressed concern about the contents of the ad and judging from the multiple responses released by The Statesman. On October 25, The Statesman defended the publishing of the ad calling it “a clearly labeled ‘advertising supplement.’”

“When this organization approached the advertising department, staff carefully reviewed the pamphlet and considered its potential impact on Statesman readers before agreeing to run it,” the statement read.

On October 28th senior Meghan Shalvoy decided to go a step further to oppose the controversial newspaper insert and get students to sign a petition demanding that The Statesman refuse such advertisements in the future. Joined by professors Kelliann Flores and Ritch Calvin from the Women’s and Gender Studies department at Stony Brook, Shlavoy set up a table at the Sprit Lounge in the Stony Brook Union to inform students about the misleading facts of the ad. Amongst the papers given out by Shalvoy were refutations of many of the ‘‘scientific’’ claims made in the “iCare” supplement. With quotes from the World Health Organization and the Journal of the American Medical Association pointing to false claims made in the ”iCare” supplement, Shalvoy called the ad, “sensational [and] clearly promoting an agenda.”

Shalvoy says that the response to the petition has so far been positive. “The only negative response I get is from claims of freedom of press,” she said. “Publications on campus should have more respect for their community. This is advertising of a specific agenda. This is not science.”

Expressing her concern about the ads, Flores said the ad was false in the information it presented. “You have to look closely to see that it is not an ad,” Flores said. Professor Calvin added that the risk of such advertisement is that it creates a hostile environment for students who might choose to have an abortion. Ads like these, he said, make students feel silenced and judged.

“[Abortion] is a difficult decision, too often the element of choice doesn’t show up in the literature. It’s not anti-child; it’s about choice,” Flores said.

Shalvoy points out that the Long Island Life Center, which advertises weekly in The Statesman, is with a similar anti-choice agenda. And the resources those places claim to provide are available for students on campus through the Student Health Center and the University Counseling Center.

The Statesman said that it carefully reviewed the pamphlet and considered the potential impact on Statesman readers before agreeing to run it, but Shalvoy points out, this is a question of integrity. “Not only is it dishonorable to disseminate such biased and sensational information,” Shalvoy said, “it is potentially harmful to the health of its readers.”

To find out more about the petition you can email: sbstudentscaretoo@gmail.com.

The Stony Brook Statesman was noticeably thicker this week, and not in a good way.

The October 8 issue was stuffed with a 12-page, full color supplement from the Human Life Alliance, a pro-life organization based out of Minnesota. The pullout is made to look like a magazine, with propagandist articles displayed under headlines like “The Long Term Effects of Abortion.”

The Statesman News Editor Lauren Cioffi responded to the ad, and clarified the paper’s policy on advertisements.

“Editors are never informed of the advertising that will go in the issue they are publishing, until after the general manager makes the decisions, and the issue goes to print,” she said.

“The News department and advertising department are two separate entities of the paper and do not work together. To reject or accept advertisements based on what the ad represents- thoughts, companies and ideas- is unlawful,” Cioffi added.

A pro-life pamphlet was distributed in thousands of copies of the October 8 Statesman.

Two student newspapers in Wisconsin refused to run the same supplement, entitled “icare…,” for fear of alienating students who might disagree with the message that the HLA sends. The University of Wisconsin—Stevens Point Pointer released a statement on the matter, saying, “we have a policy against advertising topics which have a tendency to cause conflict, shame or controversy among the student body.”

The leaflet covers every base imaginable. It attacks birth control as ineffective and dangerous; showcases testimonials from regretful teens; displays pictures of various stages of a pregnancy; it even tries to make a constitutional argument against abortions.

Most alarming, however, is the fear mongering conducted by the HLA. Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, one of the leaflet’s “experts,” argues that abortions are linked to breast cancer, an argument that has been rebuked time and again by the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, and dozens of studies conducted over the last few decades which show that there is no link between either spontaneous or induced abortions and breast cancer.

The Statesman, like many other large-scale university publications, uses advertising agencies to gather ads for each issue. The Human Life Alliance likely used one of these agencies to target campus publications. Alloy, one such agency that works with hundreds of campus publications including The Statesman, offers freestanding inserts like the one HLA distributed, though it’s unclear from exactly where this insert came from.

Stay with THiNK for all the latest on this story.