Note From The Ed-Board: on the takedown of “A Review of the 55th Inter IIT Sports Meet”

Disclaimer: Vox Populi, IIT Kanpur, is the exclusive owner of the information on this website. No part of this content may be duplicated, paraphrased, or interpreted in any other way without written consent from Vox Populi. If you want to reproduce any of the content on this page, please contact our chief editors directly or reach out to us by email at voxpopuli@iitk.ac.in

Note: This article is an Editorial by Vox Populi,IIT Kanpur

A Note From The Ed-Board

Following a contention raised in the Students’ Senate against our article “A Review of the 55th Inter IIT Sports Meet,” published on 3rd October 2023, a review committee was formed to deliberate upon the matter.Vox was directed by the Review Board to take down the investigative piece, citing multiple violations of the “Journalism Ethics and Standards document” in the article.

We stand by our work and do not agree with the findings of the Review Board. We argue that the investigation by the Review Board was procedurally flawed and incomplete, a stance we elaborate on in the following Slides.

However, as a body under the Gymkhana mandate, we have redacted the article from all formal channels until further deliberation.

CONTEXT

On the 8th of November, a contention was presented on the senate floor by the Ex-GenSec, Games & Sports (2022-23), claiming the article violated several clauses in the “Journalism Ethics and Standards document.”

In response to the contention, a five-member Review Committee was formed consisting of the President, Chairperson, parliamentarian, and 2 Ex- Vox members supposed to be nominated by the Senate.

The Review Board met once to discuss the contentions, and recommended that the article be taken down along with a formal communication to the GBM.

Our Contentions

To begin with, we argue that Vox was not fairly consulted in presenting their perspective on important contentions.An investigative piece spans months of preparation, with the Editors and the article team spending significant time drafting the piece with all its sources and claims.

As a result, the Editors have a great deal of contextual knowledge about the article, the sources, and the claims made within it.

We argue that the Editors’ views, for the most part, were not invited, and even where they were, their clarifications were not incorporated in the minutes that led to the said recommendations. This, for us, renders the Review Board’s Investigation incomplete.

For example, Vox interviewed the DCL(Deputy Contingent Leader), 55th Inter IIT Sports Meet, who said (and we quoted) : “Anybody shouldn’t take POR for the sake of placement; rather, they should be motivated towards doing something big. Things were in place this time, but the Student Representatives as a whole lacked the zeal to win the Inter IIT.”

The review board found that VOX had violated the “Journalism Ethics and Standards document” against the quotation itself, stating,

The Board felt that B.5.1 was violated by the statements as they felt that the statements were highly opinionated and their repetitive mentions showed a lack of objectivity in themselves.

At another place, the article quotes a coach saying : “The Ex-SPEC and GnS council was not providing us with these facilities…… [A coach regarding some facilities for teams].”

To which the review board says :The Board acknowledged that the Games & Sports Council is not supposed to spend its budget on Inter IIT preparation as per the Constitution of the Students’ Gymkhana. Hence, it was found that the statement contained misinformation.

Wherever the stakeholders, be it coaches, DCLs or Team Captain, have voiced concerns against PoR holders, the Review Board found that a violation had occurred.

Additionally, the investigation by the review board was laden with procedural errors as was also highlighted by multiple senators.
On 8th December 2023, the Chairperson intimated the selection of the two nominees- without consulting all the members of the nomination committee.
The minutes of the meeting repeatedly mention a second meeting to take up contentions to which no resolution was reached. However, this second meeting was never held. Yet the violations were determined.

The minutes of the meeting lack reasoning behind the conclusions drawn and assertions made. The document is replete with subjective language (mentions having “felt” as a rationale for violations) and does not attempt to justify its claims or make its reasoning transparent. We believe the mere assertion of feeling is insufficient grounds for discrediting our claims and work.
The Board’s response arbitrarily attributes ill intent to the editorial team without providing evidence.
The minutes do not include all the claims and arguments raised in the contention document to which Vox had responded.

Senate

In the 9th Special Meeting of the Senate on the 20th of March, Vox proposed the formation of a fresh review board in lieu of the various contentions in order to have a fair and just investigation and review.
Post a heated debate, the Senate voted against the proposal 28 votes to 26 and the Chairperson reiterated the directive of the said takedown and communication.

Implications

The events highlighted above set a dangerous precedent. This process of reviewing without

1) having proper grounds

2) giving Vox a chance to defend itself enables people in power to effectively use the Review Board as a censorship mechanism. This will make raising issues related to the Gymkhana / position holders very difficult and impede our ability to do meaningful journalism.

Given these circumstances, we do not feel we were given an adequate space and a proper platform to present our views and thoughts on this matter. Clause B.1, Appendix B of the Journalism Ethics & Standards Document states that “It is expected that the board covers all perspectives before landing on a decision.” However, not all perspectives have been covered, and the investigation has been full of procedural errors