Eindhoven board gets a slap on the wrist: Abuse involving Cursor
This is the outcome of an investigation following a conflict over censorship. This conflict led to a flood of news items, columns, actions, and political outrage.
The previous editor-in-chief, Han Konings, was under pressure in his work and was removed in the end from his position by the college board. The editors blacked out the website in protest, and one of the editors filed a whistleblower complaint.
Interference
Meanwhile, the Eindhoven complaint committee for “irregularities” investigated the course of events and the report is now public. There is no question of “systematic censorship,” it says, because many hundreds of articles were published and there was only occasional interference. But there was still interference.
And the Board still stands by that. The editors and the former editor-in-chief mistakenly believed that they could publish their articles in Cursor completely independently while, according to their editorial statute, they also had to “take into account the mission, objectives and interests of the university.”
That’s why, for example, an article about a PhD student who was allegedly blackmailed crossed a line. It was allegedly the third article in a series about problems with social safety at the Eindhoven University of Technology.
This censorship led to a clash between college president Robert-Jan Smits and then editor-in-chief Han Konings. Since then, according to the report, Konings behaved like “a cornered animal” and was “also treated as such.”
Climate protest
The bomb finally exploded because of an article by editor Bridget Spoor, also deleted, about alleged conflicts of interest of the new rector, Silvia Lenaerts, with the chemical industry. But the conflict started even before that. According to the report, the Eindhoven University of Technology said that Spoor had the “traits of a tabloid journalist.”
The editorial board did not make the situation any better. At the request of the Board of Governors, it wrote an assessment of the chief editor’s performance, without his knowledge and therefore without a rebuttal.
Advice
How should things proceed? The committee recommends giving Cursor more independence. “In doing so, the CvB keeps a professional distance from the journalistic work by creating the right preconditions and providing and allowing professional space for high-quality journalism.”
In addition, the board should take care not to overreact. Or, as the committee puts it, it should show “judicious compassion” “where things may not go well for a while in the future.”
Intervening less serves another interest, according to the committee. “By doing so, the confidence of the readership in the independent medium is served and promoted.” There should be a new editorial statute. The editorial board should only review the work of journalists after the fact.
Reactions
Editor Spoor is pleased with the outcome of the investigation. “I won my whistleblower case,” she declares. “There has been recognition that we as editors have been thwarted too much in our free reporting.” That, according to the report, there was no structural censorship, Spoor can appreciate. But some pieces were censored nonetheless, she stresses. “And in my opinion, any censored piece is one too many.”
But the board is also pleased. “We welcome the recommendations, which support the path we have been on for a while with Cursor,” a statement reads. The board is also happy to emphasize the conclusion that there was no systematic censorship or disproportionate interference.
And social safety? “It is a process of learning by doing,” is the BoE’s view on that. “In that context, we regret that editors of Cursor have felt that they could not do their job properly. We did not adequately acknowledge that.”
The editorial board is also full of praise for the report. This is because the committee does not pass judgment on the “journalistic and content quality,” which was paramount for the editorial board in all of its recommendations.
Delta
After Cursor, Delft news platform Delta also clashed with its board. Delta had to remove a piece on social safety. Deltawas also not allowed to attend a public meeting about social safety at the university.
Recently, political parties asked Minister Dijkgraaf what he thought about this. He did not want to intervene, although he underlined the importance of freedom of the press in higher education and spoke to administrators about it.
