A message from the Editor-in-Chief regarding Poster Slam 2010

In the Thursday, March 4 issue of the Gateway, we printed our annual “Poster Slam” feature, which satirically lampoons the election posters of the Students' Union election candidates.

While the Poster Slam is, and always has been intended to be satirical in nature, certain remarks made by myself and other contributors to the article have been interpreted by some readers and members of the public as being racist in nature, specifically those directed towards candidates Vikram Seth and Sangram Hansra.

As an influential member of the Canadian student press and a voice of University of Alberta students, the Gateway prides itself in being a leader in the accuracy, quality, and accessibility of its content. Poster Slam, in addition to many other annual features printed in the Gateway, has a long-standing reputation of being humourous and inane, distilling the often too-serious nature of Students' Union elections into a format that is enjoyable for the average student. Any statements made in these articles are not intended to cause serious harm to the reputation of their subjects, whether in regards to their campaign platforms, race, gender, sexuality, ability, or any other factors that may be visible in the public consciousness. And nowhere will the Gateway state or imply that any candidate is unfit for political office based on any visible minority status, nor do its panellists hold such sentiments. However, despite our editorial board's best efforts to ensure this is always the case, at times, an act of poor judgement may still cause offence to the candidates or to our readers at large.

These issues have been recently brought to our attention by some of our readers. Many of the responses we have received have come as a result of the coverage given to the issue by local television news stations. Unfortunately, due to the manner in which the issue was presented by certain stations, it was not given full context or a fair representation of the parties involved. Although I have spoken with both Mr. Seth and Mr. Hansra in an amicable manner, I will not represent their opinions here; instead, I encourage them to offer their own responses and share their complete feelings on the matter.

However, I will comment on the allegation that I “refuse[d] to apologize.” In actuality, I insisted that the Gateway sincerely does listen to the opinions of our readers, and that if we feel that a representative group of readers found the comments offensive, that we would in fact consider an apology. I feel that my words were taken out of context, and that both myself and the situation have been represented in a biased manner by irresponsible journalism, which has only served to further inflame an already volatile situation.

But considering the comments made by myself and others in the Poster Slam through the concerns brought up by readers, it is clear that, regardless of original intent, they were poorly worded and potentially offensive. Because of this, as both the chief representative of the Gateway and on behalf of those involved in Poster Slam 2010, I would like to apologize for any comments in the article that have caused offence to the candidates, our readers, or the general public.

Furthermore, I would like to encourage our readership to engage the Gateway on any matters they feel are not representative of their opinions. Based on a 2002 referendum, undergraduate students at the University of Alberta pay $3.09 per term to support our publication, and therefore, have a valid say in the content we produce. What is set in ink on our pages does not necessarily mean the final word; we welcome our readers to write letters of response and engage both the Gateway and fellow students in a dialogue on any issues they feel are important to the student body as a whole. As the lone primary source of campus news, it is our hope that we can continue to represent the student body in a fair manner, and to treat such editorial missteps as a learning experience for the future.