This is the outcome of an investigation following a conflict on censorship. This conflict led to a host of news items, columns, actions and political indignation.
The previous editor-in-chief, Han Konings, was put under pressure while carrying out his work and ultimately relieved of his duties by the Executive Board. The editorial staff blacked out the website in protest and one of the editors filed a whistleblower complaint.
Interference
The Eindhoven university’s committee for reporting ‘irregularities’ has completed its investigation into the way things were handled and its report is now public. There was no ‘systematic censorship’, it says, because hundreds and hundreds of articles were published and there was only occasional interference. But there was interference.
What’s more, the board still stands by its actions. The editors and former editor-in-chief are claimed to have wrongly assumed they were entirely independent in publishing their articles in Cursor, while their editorial statute dictates they also “keep in mind the mission, objectives and interests of the university”.
This meant, for instance, that an article about a PhD candidate who was reportedly blackmailed was cancelled. It was to be the third article in a series on problems relating to social safety at Eindhoven University of Technology.
This censorship led to a clash between Executive Board President Robert-Jan Smits and the editor-in-chief at the time, Han Konings. Ever since that, the report reads, Konings was a deer caught in the headlights and he was “also treated as such”.
Climate protest
Things came to a head due to another cancelled article, by editor Bridget Spoor, on an alleged conflict of interest of the new rector, Silvia Lenaerts, involving the chemical industry. But the conflict had been going on for longer. According to the report, Eindhoven University of Technology said about Spoor that she “has a tendency towards sensation journalism”.
The editorial board didn’t exactly improve the situation. At the request of the Executive Board, it wrote an assessment of the functioning of the editor-in-chief, without his knowledge and, therefore, without hearing his side of the story.
Advice
What’s next? The committee advises giving Cursor more independence. “In so doing, the Executive Board keeps a professional distance to the journalistic work, by creating the right preconditions and by providing and leaving professional room for high-quality journalism.”
Furthermore, the board shouldn’t be so quick to lose its cool. Or, as the committee puts it: it must show “sensible compassion in case things aren’t going so well in any point in the future”.
Intervening less serves another purpose, according to the committee: “It serves and fosters the readership’s trust in the independent medium.” A new editorial statute should be drafted. The editorial board should only assess the work of journalists after publication.
Response
Editor Spoor is pleased with the outcome of the investigation. “I won my whistleblower case”, she states. “There has been recognition that we, as editors, have been obstructed too much in our free reporting.” She understands that the report says there wasn’t any systematic censorship. But some pieces were censored, she emphasises. “And in my opinion, every censored piece is one too many.”
But the board is happy too. “We welcome the recommendations, which support the path that we have been following with Cursor for some time”, a statement reads. The board also underlines the conclusion that systematic censorship or disproportionate interference did not occur.
And social safety? “It is a process of learning by doing”, is how the Executive Board phrases its opinion on the matter. “In this context, we regret that Cursor’s editors have felt unable to perform their work effectively. This was something that we did not sufficiently realise.”
The editorial board is also full of praise of the report, as the committee doesn’t pass judgement on the “journalistic and substantive quality” and this was reportedly paramount for the editorial board in all its recommendations.
Delta
After Cursor, the Delft news platform Delta also butted heads with its own Executive Board. Delta was told to retract an article on social safety. Delta was also denied access to a public meeting on social safety at the university.
Political parties recently asked Minister Dijkgraaf for his thoughts on the matter. He didn’t want to intervene himself, although he did stress the importance of freedom of press in higher education and called administrators to account in this respect.
HOP, Bas Belleman