Gone are the days of Student Union bars and Venues?

Recently I discovered a campaign to Save Our Student Union (S.O.Su) at Oxford Brookes, Much like our own situation Oxford Brookes Student Union (OBSU) doesn't own its own venue, it belongs to the University who operate and own the building which the Union then use.

However, in Oxford the union is moving, its getting a shiny new building with purpose built office space. However, the University is dragging its feet on a decision on whether to build a venue for students or not.

What we need to understand here is the subtle difference between a Students' Union and a Students' Union. Ok I know I just repeated myself, the first Student's Union I refer to is the democratic student support organisation. The sabbs, the media, the course reps and the sports teams is what I'm talking about. The other Student's Union is a building, a club, a bar somewhere to drink and shimmy.  The second is only called a Union by chance it in fact can be called anything. For example Reading is called 3Sixty. As some "Union Venues" (the second type of Union) are owned and operated by either the University or trading arms of the Uni does this show that Unions are either unwilling or incapable of running venues? By why let the Uni run it? If the students are willing to sub-contract out their venue to a non-democratic organisation, why let it be the Uni? How about a student union run by the same people as Liquid and Envy? Or a bar run by Scream of Yellow Card fame?

The University of Brighton Students' Union holds its official Wednesday night in Digital, the local branch of a nation chain of clubs, is that such a bad thing?

A university is primarily an academic and profit making organisation tasked with teaching students. Not just undergrads but masters, doctors and whatever else is up that tree. It also performs ground breaking research. Portsmouth has an international reputation in Brain Tumours, Bra design and sports science. Not on its list of objectives, or experiences is running a night club. Do those with experience and training in teaching and research necessarily have the skills needed to run and promote a venue? So why do they try?

Would you go to a Uni with no student owned social scene? No sports club chanting, no fancy dress?

Is that what makes you decide on a uni? Does the uni know this and run a club just as a marketing method to get more students on courses?

Why does everyone want a Student Union Bar or Venue?

So after a busy media day covering Ben Norman's Activists Academy and the School of Rock's acoustic night, all of which were good fun and will have pictures available shortly, i was on my walk home.

 The whole of Hampshire Terrace was closed off by police, with cones, tape and everything everywhere. I was intrigued.

 Found a police officer leaning over the front of a collision investigation unit and I asked if he could give me a clue what was going on, he nodded towards a car with a large dent in the side, I then enquired about the possibility of getting a few pictures, I was just thinking a few stock images of police tape, vehicles stuff like that. 

The office asked me very politely if I would mind doing it from a particular side of the road as they had a perimeter and didn't want me getting in their way. I agreed to the very fair request and trotted off. At this point i spotted a Police motorcycle laying underneath the dent in the side of the car, this now became a very tense situation. Accidents are one thing, accidents involving the police are typically a little emotional for the staff on scene. 

I casually get my kit out of my bag during which time another officer politely asks me who i am taking pictures for. I whip out my collection of press cards and explain i'm a student and a freelance photographer, the officer passes me back my cards commenting on how grumpy i look in my photo. 

I take my first photo, with my flash gun and all hell breaks loose. A chap in the pub starts hollering at me something about seeing my press card, and "what do you think your doing" a police sergeant arrives claiming that its incredibly rude to start taking pictures without his permission. I explain to the Sgt that i had already spoken to two of his colleagues.  He assures me that it is my responsibility to seek his approval. 

I am then told that if I don't do as I'm told he will confiscate my camera, At this point I get a little confused, I'm on public property, taking photos of something on public property. There is as far as I'm aware no reason why anything I'm doing is wrong, unless somehow i am in breach of the 2005 prevention of terrosim bill which I really can't see anyone justifying that. 

 I point this out to the helpful Sgt who sulks away,

Now the guy from the pub reappears and now refers to me as "pap scum", "a parasite on society" and "the reason princess Diana died"

 All in all i think this shows an incredible level of hatred and misunderstanding to the media world. Not everyone involved in media is sensationalist, money grabbing whore, some of us actually believe in fair journalism. In holding ourselves to the highest levels of accountability, using the NUJ code of conduct not as target but as a bench mark to what I do, the press complaints commission code of practice is not something to find ways around, but to be strictly and vehemently abided by.

I'm not a journalist to make money, become famous and expose peoples private life, that's the job of gossip merchants. I'm here to inform, stimulate debate, to help people make up there own minds  to provide people with information and to act as a way of people expressing themselves.

So, on my trawl through the bbc news, as i do at least twice daily I found this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7308654.stm

the beebs correspondent is making a very interesting point about US primary election spending. And well he uses an example of doughnuts £3,000 spent in one city alone and gives some incredible figures on other amounts spent too.

I'd now like to take compare this to the UPSU elections, with its cap on election spending, which some have complained that the £60 is a little restrictive and hasn't allowed for inflation since the 1950's either way isnt the point.

Throughout the elections, of which i was around for a lot of the time. WHERE WERE THE DOUGHTNUTS???? there was two boxes of krispy Kremes,which I brought down to the Union.

**Sulks** 

So today saw the close of UPSU Sabbatical elections. Still awaiting confirmation from UPSU over who is standing, this could be fun. We will endeavour to bring you as much information as we will be practically able to.

Ohh and this evening, in the office, doing a little bit of work and get a frantic phone call. Guildhall is full of fire engines and blue shiny lights.

Me and Tom (our Resident  cameraman) were on scene within minutes to document....... a fire brigade exercise. Damn it, it seemed quite exciting and it gave as an opportunity to get some stock images and chat to some new contacts.

Anyway, Gamel Mag editor has just come into my house (i'm not sure who let him in) and is demanding I do on a Pugwash Social, SO i better go. He is my boss and everything

So, as you can see from the lateest bumper 16 page first in a series edition of Pugwash News, elections are upon us.

I’m not going to preach to you about why you should get involved, I am going to discuss the role of UPSU media.  News, current affairs and anything timely comes under my job description, which means the elections and particularly how the printed and online media cover them becomes my responsibility. This on one hand means that I have news to write on without looking too far, which has its benefits considering the exams, deadlines and whatever else is being demanded of me by my degree. However,  a whole new dilemma appears when covering elections. One that has got me slightly stumped and baffled: should we cover elections? How do we cover them fairly and without showing bias or appearing to show bias?

The BBC and the mainstream press have a similar dilemma when it comes to general elections. When it comes to general elections the BBC have a responsibility to cover the current government and the official opposition along with Liberal Democrats in equal measures. This works fine, however with the UPSU sabbatical elections the number of candidates can be huge, and to mention everyone would involve having a paper four times the size and me having the long overdue heart attack.

So where do we go? Do we only report on candidates doing interesting things? But then who defines interesting?

We could just ignore the whole process but that would then fail my primary aim, which is to try and educate and stimulate debate amongst you our readers.

I’m lost and my brain hurts, am I over reacting? Is this just a huge collection of pig laws or do I have reason to fret?