When I began as editor in chief of The Mercury, I was told that administration would be my biggest adversary. We entered the year expecting attempts to silence us. What I didn’t expect, however, was to face that opposition from fellow students. 

On April 3, the Committee on Student Media (COSM) was scheduled to interview candidates for The Mercury’s editor in chief and managing editor positions. We expected to receive decisions later that day.  

Instead, after sitting in the lobby for half an hour, none of us were interviewed.

Student Media has struggled this year to secure fair representation on COSM, the committee responsible for overseeing general operations, mediating disputes and appointing the head leadership for all four outlets, with terms beginning May 1.

In the February issue of The Mercury, I expressed concern over Student Government-appointed COSM members that were employed by a competing publication. Those members were removed by COSM during the Feb. 20 meeting. 

Two new undergraduate appointees from Student Government were selected in time to move the appointment process forward. With those changes, I expected a functional interview process and prepared to defend the position I have held for nearly a year. 

During the April 3 meeting, Chairman McClain Watson was about to invite the first candidate to begin interviews when concerns were raised by the new appointees. They stated that the candidates for The Mercury did not meet a bylaw requiring the editor in chief and managing editor to have at least one byline in four separate issues during the semester of appointment. 

Director of Student Media Karen Fioretti clarified that the students would meet these qualifications by April 20, when the fourth issue of the semester is published. 

Fioretti then made a motion to make any potential Mercury appointments to proceed conditional on meeting that requirement. The motion passed 6-1-1. 

A subsequent motion to table, or set aside, bylaw discussions until after new leaders were appointed passed 6-2.

However, as interviews were about to begin, the two Student Government appointees left the conference room, breaking quorum and cancelling interviews entirely. This followed notice from another Student Government undergraduate, given just hours prior, that they would not be in attendance. Without the required number of student COSM members present, COSM could not proceed with interviews. 

This left The Mercury without confirmed leadership for the next year. 

If you’ve chosen to participate on a committee, why refuse to sit through the very meeting you’re responsible for? 

Emails obtained by The Mercury show that these members do not plan to participate in the rescheduled April 24 interviews unless COSM passes a motion to revise the bylaws over the summer in consultation with third-party experts.  

To be clear, I believe that some bylaw revisions are necessary. I intend to propose changes this summer, as I did last year, if reappointed as editor in chief. 

However, it is not fair to take actions that effectively hold Student Media employees’ jobs and paychecks hostage until one’s demands are met. 

This final round of interviews comes just before current leadership terms end on April 30, leaving little room for delay. It is unclear if the undergraduate COSM vice chair will attend after missing the last meeting. 

However, one critical difference sets the April 24 interviews apart. 

All of the Student Media leadership is scheduled to be interviewed. 

Not just The Mercury, but all of Student Media. This includes AMP, Radio UTD and UTD TV.  

Communications from Student Government raise further concerns about how these decisions are being applied. In an email after the April 3 meeting, the Student Government president wrote that the Student Government COSM appointees “remain open to attending and observing the interview processes for AMP, UTD TV, and Radio UTD,” notably excluding The Mercury. 

This contrasts with a more recent email from a member who walked out, in which she expressed bylaw concerns for all outlets. All Student Media organizations operate under the same bylaws. If those concerns were truly universal, participation, or lack thereof, would be consistent across all outlets.

If the bylaws are the issue, they apply uniformly to all Student Media outlets. Choosing to walk out of The Mercury’s interviews while remaining willing to participate in the others tells me that standards here aren’t being applied fairly. 

If no leaders are appointed before May 1, over 80 students employed by these outlets will be out of a job, as the leadership elected by COSM is responsible for choosing their own staff. 

Many students rely on their stipends and contributor pay to afford rent, groceries and other necessities. Others have found purpose creating content they love and are passionate about in Student Media.  

Failing to appoint leadership effectively shuts down all four official Student Media outlets. 

Actions that prevent Student Media from functioning contradict the principles of free expression. These actions are especially concerning, coming from members of our own Student Government.  

This is also a weaponization of voting power. If members can break quorum or block decisions they disagree with, any future committee can be rendered ineffective at will. In this committee, the majority rules, unless the minority decides to shut it down. 

Student Government is supposed to govern and protect the rights of all students, yet repeated actions by its appointees have destabilized Student Media. 

For our Mercury readers, this uncertainty puts the May issue in jeopardy. As of right now, The Mercury has been unable to secure leadership for the upcoming year. We will continue to keep our community informed of any changes to our publication schedule.  

This year has been challenging enough for its creative outlets as-is. Student Media doesn’t need its own Student Government taking actions that prevent its outlets from being able to function. 

While there is little reason to believe this pattern will change, it remains critical to call it out and inform our community of actions that threaten the livelihood of Student Media.