Queen’s Journal claims student government cut advertising after unflattering editorial

By Mary-Katherine Boss, Student Lounge Editor

In early September, Queen's University’s student government, the Alma Mater Society (AMS), pulled its advertising from the campus’s student newspaper, The Queen’s Journal. While the AMS said the decision was purely financial, Journal editors see it as a result of its unflattering coverage of the society.

By Mary-Katherine Boss, Student Lounge Editor

In early September, Queen's University’s student government, the Alma Mater Society (AMS), pulled its advertising from the campus’s student newspaper, The Queen’s Journal. While the AMS said the decision was purely financial, Journal editors see it as a result of its unflattering coverage of the society.

The AMS is the Journal's publisher, so it has some control over the Journal's finances but no editorial control. Once one of the paper’s top advertisers, the AMS's funding to the Journal has declined in recent years, putting a strain on the paper's finances.

Between the 2011-2012 and the 2012-2013 school years, the Journal's campus advertising revenue, made up mostly by the AMS, dropped from $72,472 to $32,848. This year, it budgeted for $22,975 but has only received $2,357, and Journal editors don't expect that number to increase by much.

Related content on J-Source:

Journal editors believe the sharp decline is a result of the Journal running an article just before the school year criticizing the AMS's expensive renovation of the campus nightclub. Co-editor-in-chief Janina Enrile said shortly after the editorial was published, advertising from the ASM disappeared almost entirely.

"We didn't see the connection right away," Enrile said. "But their marketing officer, Jacob Trenholm, met with our business manager and told us, among some other reasons, that the AMS didn't want to advertise with us because our editorial content was not in line with the message they wanted to convey to students."

Enrile said the Journal has not run an AMS advertisement since September unless it was mandated by Journal or AMS policy, such as advertising during elections. "It's a little strange because the Journal has always maintained its place as the critical eye on campus, and this is the first time we've ever seen it significantly affect our financials," Enrile said.

Various departments within the AMS decided to review the Journal's finances during the annual budget process and decided that advertising with the paper wasn't cost-effective. "We have not prevented any parties from advertising with the Journal," said Jacob Trenholm, AMS marketing officer, in an email to J-Source. "The decision to pursue alternative advertising channels was made independently by the various offices, commissions and services of the AMS."

He said the AMS doesn't see the same tangible results from print ads as they do with advertising and marketing on Facebook or YouTube. With all the other options now available, Trenholm said the AMS needs better advertising value than the Journal currently offers. He said it has nothing to do with the Journal being critical of the AMS or its decisions.

"I think the issue here, largely, is that student governments often tend to see themselves as corporations or companies or business units that work at their own agendas," said Larry Cornies, coordinator of the print and broadcast journalism programs at Conestoga College in Kitchener, Ont. "It's quite easy for them to lose sight of the fact that they are, in essence, the handmaidens of the students."

Students pay sizable fees each year to student governments and they deserve to have this money spent in places that best serve their needs, Cornies said. This should include student newspapers that act as a watchdog of the student government, regardless of whether student newspapers give the student governments the best return on advertising dollars.

The Journal is under pressure from the AMS to make even more budget cuts, resulting in a tenuous relationship. Trenholm said that despite the advertising decline, the AMS will continue to financially support the Journal through advertising and deficit coverage, but Journal editors don't believe that. "One of their mandates is to support student organizations like the Journal and to not see them support us is especially discouraging," Enrile said.

This comes as part of a long line of financial problems for the Journal. Over the summer, under a projected deficit of $40,000, the paper decided to cut some of its print issues. Nearly half of their issues are now exclusively published online, part of a trend that Maclean's on Campus wrote about recently.

Brendan Kergin, national bureau chief for the Canadian University Press (CUP) said relationships between student governments and student papers are often complex. However, he said CUP has rarely encountered a situation in which student government funding for a student paper has been pulled so drastically.

"If we ever heard of a situation where student government was vindictive of coverage where the coverage was fair and objective and true, we would obviously support the paper," said Kergin, noting that it would also depend on the specific case.     

Kergin also said this debate is not unique, the reason usually given when funding is pulled from a student paper is that it is not a suitable investment for the student government at the time. "Whether that's spin or the truth, whether it's due to bad coverage or financials, is often unclear," he said. 

Related content on J-Source: