Archive This article is from our archive and might not display correctly. Download PDF
Many people will know that Nouse has been operating within the University of York since 1964. For the last 54 years, this paper has been publishing between one and three editions every term. We at Nouse estimate anywhere between 250 and 480 editions have been produced over the years. As part of my new role in the paper, I have the wonderful opportunity to look at how the news-paper has evolved, and what it has taught me is how professionalism in student journalism is a good of the University. It is unfortunate to see, however, how that concept has been slipping, with our rivals on campus, in recent months.
We can forget how much effort has to be put into newspapers on campus. In an edition from 1974, a team of 10 lamented having to produce the paper by themselves. With a team of over 60 today, I can barely imagine the stress that those people would be under to produce a paper, but they did it. To produce something like Nouse or York Vision, a massive amount of time and care needs to be taken. On the whole, it is shown that the editors of the past understood their task and undertook it with the greatest journalistic integrity. That is why I am shocked by how that standard has slipped in York Vision. Their decisions over the past two years of attempted publications bewilder me, as they do not reflect the high-esteem that their past editors had for what they were doing. Particularly of the values that made Vision award-winning. The Nouse archive has various editions of Vision (including from the year they falsely declared themselves "the most award-winning student newspaper") and I see a dynamic, hard-hitting paper that was the voice of student revolt. It is a shame that in 31 years of printing, their editorial team do not treat the newspaper with respect. Turning from the rebel yell of campus, to the bargain basement of Fleet Street.
Vision should expect the worst consequences for what was the naive, stupid and, in many ways, dangerous decisions made in their last edition. I signed the letter calling for their deratification, not because I want them condemned to the history books, but because I think that the only way to solve the systemic issues within the newspaper is for them to, quite literally, start all over again. In my university life, I have never seen York Vision in good health, and looking at their previous editions, I think that is a tragedy.
Alumni of the paper will know its true potential, but sadly this cannot be said for current students. I have had the opportunity to see the legacy that the current Vision team inherited and I am truly disturbed. Every decision we make at Nouse is taken with the knowledge that 54 years of media heritage is riding on our backs. I can safely say this is lacking in York Vision. To those who cannot access the archives, they will be remembered for what they have done in the past three years.
To third years they will be the paper that spluttered and died. To second years it was the newspaper that wasn't afraid to publish a white chair as its front page (then declare it a joke, then declare their declaration a joke, so on and so forth). To first years it will be known by the two words that doomed a newspaper: "send nudes".