Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why do they still print The Observer?

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Raphael
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,880 ✭✭✭Raphael


    No one's saying the Observer has to go away. The College Tribune has shown that a college newspaper can easily operate in UCD without 50k a year from the students pockets. So why exactly will the Observer disappear if it's taken away?

    I, being the person who asked my rep to raise this motion, and am therefore responsible for this hub-bub, have absolutely no desire to see the Observer go away. I would just like to see them cease to be Constitutionally mandated and directly SU funded. If they were the only paper, or if the Tribune was getting similar funding from another source, then I wouldn't dream of raising the issue, and I'd vote against the referendum. But the fact is, they don't need the funding, and right now I think any money saved is a good thing.


    And I agree with you about the other things that should be removed from SU funding as well. The accounts are actually public, it's where the 50k figure is from. I don't see this as the solution to mis-spending in the SU. I see it as a decent place to start.


  • Options
    #93
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    mynameissarah wrote: »
    I never suggested that it should be restricted to media, I was merely pointing to the fact that I feel the funding goes to good use.

    But the SU is infamous for writing blank cheques without any regard for cost or economic use of the money, mainly because there is no shortage of cash. I think the point people are making is that if the Observer should cut costs where it can.


  • Options
    #94
    mynameissarah
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭mynameissarah


    Riamfada wrote: »
    But the SU is infamous for writing blank cheques without any regard for cost or economic use of the money, mainly because there is no shortage of cash. I think the point people are making is that if the Observer should cut costs where it can.

    And if you read my post, I think you'll see that I'm not saying no to costs being cut, I'm saying no to the SU giving up on student media altogether.

    What I fail to understand is why no accounts are published.


  • Options
    #95
    mynameissarah
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭mynameissarah


    Raphael wrote: »
    The accounts are actually public, it's where the 50k figure is from.

    I was under the impression that this was the budget projection and not the actual publication of monies spent?


  • Options
    #96
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    Split the radio away from the paper. Belfield FM does not need any attachment to that poisoned chalice.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Raphael
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,880 ✭✭✭Raphael


    I apologise, you're correct. However I do believe the accounts are also viewable, though you may need to head down to the SU corridor and ask to see them.


  • Options
    #98
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    Split the radio away from the paper. Belfield FM does not need any attachment to that poisoned chalice.

    They are split if I recall correctly although the radio budget is 20% of the newspaper budget even though the radio has 900% more output on a daily basis through the college year and significantly high running and upkeep costs.


  • Options
    #99
    parker kent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭parker kent


    Has anybody ever listened to Belfield FM? I never did so wondering if anyone else ever has. Not saying it in a sarky way, just asking a genuine question!


  • Options
    #100
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    parker kent wrote: »
    Has anybody ever listened to Belfield FM? I never did so wondering if anyone else ever has. Not saying it in a sarky way, just asking a genuine question!

    www.belfieldfm.ie


  • Options
    #101
    Thomas_S_Hunterson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,151 ✭✭✭Thomas_S_Hunterson


    Riamfada wrote: »
    the radio budget is 20% of the newspaper budget even though the radio has 900% more output on a daily basis
    Comparisons like this are quite often not very meaningful.

    What sort of metric are you using to measure output per day?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    mloc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭mloc


    Thomas_S_Hunterson wrote: »
    Comparisons like this are quite often not very meaningful.

    What sort of metric are you using to measure output per day?

    Volts.


  • Options
    #103
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    Thomas_S_Hunterson wrote: »
    Comparisons like this are quite often not very meaningful.

    What sort of metric are you using to measure output per day?

    Well not that im that anal that I would post about it online or have issue with it but its measured by time.


  • Options
    #104
    Thomas_S_Hunterson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,151 ✭✭✭Thomas_S_Hunterson


    Riamfada wrote: »
    Well not that im that anal that I would post about it online or have issue with it but its measured by time.

    So how many seconds is an issue of the Observer?


  • Options
    #105
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    Thomas_S_Hunterson wrote: »
    So how many seconds is an issue of the Observer?

    Well for every day the Observer publishes content the radio station does 9 and thats if you class throwing out a few papers work.


  • Options
    #106
    Thomas_S_Hunterson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,151 ✭✭✭Thomas_S_Hunterson


    By that exact same logic, if I do a few hours of podcasting 7 days a week then I'm more productive than the Irish Times who can only manage 6.


  • Options
    #107
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    Thomas_S_Hunterson wrote: »
    By that exact same logic, if I do a few hours of podcasting 7 days a week then I'm more productive than the Irish Times who can only manage 6.

    Well yeah, you obviously produce more podcast content. Anyway to conclude the fact that the radio broadcasts 7 days a week means little compared to the newpapers 1 every 14 days.


  • Options
    #108
    parker kent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭parker kent


    Riamfada wrote: »
    Well yeah, you obviously produce more podcast content. Anyway to conclude the fact that the radio broadcasts 7 days a week means little compared to the newpapers 1 every 14 days.

    But how long do people spend listening to Belfield FM compared to reading the University Observer? I get your overall point, but I think people are far more aware of the newspaper.


  • Options
    #109
    mynameissarah
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭mynameissarah


    Raphael wrote: »
    I apologise, you're correct. However I do believe the accounts are also viewable, though you may need to head down to the SU corridor and ask to see them.

    That's perfectly fine, not your fault, but it is precisely what I take issue with in this debate.

    I believe that former Deputy Editor Gavan Reilly has already pointed out the fact that The Observer does not use all of this funding, it is a worst case scenario figure, yet is has been repeatedly thrown about in this debate with NO clarification from any of the sources using it.

    I think the issue of this €50,000 meeds to be clarified before this referendum goes ahead. You cannot tell students that The University Observer is costing them €50,000 if it is not costing them €50,000.

    I have never heard of SU accounts being available to view before, perhaps now it is time we see them published.


  • Options
    #110
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    Riamfada wrote: »
    They are split if I recall correctly although the radio budget is 20% of the newspaper budget even though the radio has 900% more output on a daily basis through the college year and significantly high running and upkeep costs.

    Observer budget is 50,000€, Belfield FM's is 8,500€. The radio gets absolutely no help from the Union while the paper can post articles about James Williamson's everday life and continue to get that much money (abeit the editor was sacked). New studio being built next year; UCD students paid for it so they should be aloud use it.


  • Options
    #111
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    OSI wrote: »
    I did for all of 10 minutes before wanting to go and burn down their little shack...

    10 minutes? Your opinion is entirely relevant so!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    OSI wrote: »
    If somethings ****, you're not gonna spend the next week listening to it are you?

    But no, it wasn't just ****, it was rage inducing.

    Crazy as it might sound, there is more than one show on Belfield FM. What show were you listening to?


  • Options
    #113
    ThisIsNonsense
    Registered Users Posts: 8 ✭ThisIsNonsense


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    Observer budget is 50,000€, Belfield FM's is 8,500€. The radio gets absolutely no help from the Union while the paper can post articles about James Williamson's everday life and continue to get that much money (abeit the editor was sacked). New studio being built next year; UCD students paid for it so they should be aloud use it.

    Editor was NOT sacked; it unfortunately coincidental that she chose to resign in the aftermath of that story; If you read the paper you would know that. She resigned for purely personal reasons.


  • Options
    #114
    keepkeyyellow
    Registered Users Posts: 705 ✭✭✭keepkeyyellow


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    Observer budget is 50,000€, Belfield FM's is 8,500€. The radio gets absolutely no help from the Union while the paper can post articles about James Williamson's everday life and continue to get that much money (abeit the editor was sacked). New studio being built next year; UCD students paid for it so they should be aloud use it.

    The editor was not sacked she resigned for personal reasons.

    I've worked on Belfield FM and the Oberver and far more work goes into the Observer, in Belfield FM we'd just go in and talk about random nonsense, I remember there was one person who was fond of saying that everything was a 'disgrace'.


  • Options
    #115
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    ThisIsNonsense wrote: »
    Editor was NOT sacked; it unfortunately coincidental that she chose to resign in the aftermath of that story; If you read the paper you would know that. She resigned for purely personal reasons.
    She jumped before she was pushed. I wouldn't read the Observer, it's gone way down hill in the last two years. Trib all the way!


  • Options
    #116
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    keepkeyyellow wrote: »
    The editor was not sacked she resigned for personal reasons.

    I've worked on Belfield FM and the Oberver and far more work goes into the Observer, in Belfield FM we'd just go in and talk about random nonsense, I remember there was one person who was fond of saying that everything was a 'disgrace'.

    She jumped before she was pushed.

    I admittedly have not worked for either paper but I know many people who have and who have also worked on the radio. If you are doing a proper show (news, sport, specialist music) work goes into it. Of course there will be those who want to piss about.


  • Options
    #117
    Fad
    Registered Users Posts: 7,231 ✭✭✭Fad


    If I was to take issue with a particular soc getting funding, who would I go to?


  • Options
    #118
    Raphael
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,880 ✭✭✭Raphael


    mynameissarah wrote: »
    That's perfectly fine, not your fault, but it is precisely what I take issue with in this debate.

    I believe that former Deputy Editor Gavan Reilly has already pointed out the fact that The Observer does not use all of this funding, it is a worst case scenario figure, yet is has been repeatedly thrown about in this debate with NO clarification from any of the sources using it.

    I think the issue of this €50,000 meeds to be clarified before this referendum goes ahead. You cannot tell students that The University Observer is costing them €50,000 if it is not costing them €50,000.

    I have never heard of SU accounts being available to view before, perhaps now it is time we see them published.
    He did, and he made a number of other excellent points too. As a result of something Gav pointed out about the motion, I've spoken to my class rep about pulling it, as it would outright kill both the Observer and Belfield FM, which would be a Bad Thing (TM). It wouldn't really allow them, as intended, to become their own separate body.

    Essentially, the Observer and Belfield FM don't exist as their own body, so if their existence as a part of the SU was terminated, as this motion would do, they'd just go away. Which would be aforementioned Bad Thing (TM)

    Fad wrote: »
    If I was to take issue with a particular soc getting funding, who would I go to?
    Richard Butler would probably be a good place to start. His office is upstairs in the Student Centre. If you don't mind my asking, which soc, and why?


  • Options
    #119
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    keepkeyyellow wrote: »
    saying that everything was a 'disgrace'.

    aimed at me?


  • Options
    #120
    Not hiding behind a Nickname K Woods
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7 ✭Not hiding behind a Nickname K Woods


    Diverging from the argument currently ongoing and on a positive note, did anyone happen to catch a look at the current issue of O-two (The University Observer's awarding winning culture magazine)? It was an awesome issue overall.

    Their interview with Michael Sheen was amazing and their film section was chock-a-block with awesome reviews for some of the biggest titles being released in the coming weeks.

    One qualm I had with the latest issue was that it lacked the cutting edge colour writing that the penmanship skills of Killian Woods (co-O-two Editor) offers. I am hopeful that he will feature in the coming issue. In fact I am fairly confident he will as he looks to boost his pool of articles that are possible for entry into the upcoming Smedias (Student Media Awards).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    keepkeyyellow
    Registered Users Posts: 705 ✭✭✭keepkeyyellow


    Riamfada wrote: »
    aimed at me?

    No actually

    Not hiding behind a Nickname K Woods wrote: »
    Diverging from the argument currently ongoing and on a positive note, did anyone happen to catch a look at the current issue of O-two (The University Observer's awarding winning culture magazine)? It was an awesome issue overall.

    Their interview with Michael Sheen was amazing and their film section was chock-a-block with awesome reviews for some of the biggest titles being released in the coming weeks.

    One qualm I had with the latest issue was that it lacked the cutting edge colour writing that the penmanship skills of Killian Woods (co-O-two Editor) offers. I am hopeful that he will feature in the coming issue. In fact I am fairly confident he will as he looks to boost his pool of articles that are possible for entry into the upcoming Smedias (Student Media Awards).

    I second this


Advertisement