Anti-merger students must strike

If you’re a regular reader of the IDS, you probably noticed last week’s 120-point headline about the proposed merger between the School of Journalism and the departments of Telecommunications and Communication and Culture.

Last week, Provost Lauren Robel confirmed she will recommend the merger to the Board of Trustees, who will have to approve the plan.

Robel claims that merging the three units will better serve students by consolidating the resources of each area to create a new school better suited to the rapidly shifting media landscape.

The plan would also place the merged department under the control of the College of Arts and Sciences, a dramatic shift away from the independent status of the J-School.
 
Accompanying the IDS article that explained the situation was a statement from our editor-in-chief, Michael Auslen.

In his editorial, Auslen condemned the merger as a threat to the independence of both the J-School and IU Student Media.

He linked the merger to the closings of the Office for Women’s Affairs and the Leo R. Dowling International Center as examples of the IU administration ignoring students’ voices.

He also acknowledged the IDS’s “complacent” acceptance of past decisions by the administration.

While I think the IDS did a fine job of outlining the details of the situation, and I applaud Auslen’s re-commitment to holding the administration accountable, I think students who oppose the merger must go further than asking hard questions.

Robel has met with faculty and administrators, but it seems little attention has been paid to the concerns of students.

This failure is glaring, because it is the students who have the most to lose during any merger.

It is difficult to imagine a merger of three radically different units that does anything but harm the quality of the education received by students.

Further, it is difficult to disentangle the independent prestige of the J-School from the value of an IU journalism degree.

The merger not only threatens current students but also the entire future of journalism at IU.

As Auslen points out, this is only the latest example of the administration making decisions for students rather than with students.

The future of journalism, telecommunications and communication and culture ought to be decided by students and faculty working together in a democratic manner, not by an unapproachable administration.

Of course, Provost Robel and the Board of Trustees have no interest in such a
solution.

It would compromise their authority over the student body.

Fortunately for students in the threatened departments, there has never been a better time to fight back.

Students who oppose the merger must join the IU Strike effort.

For too long students have been split apart, appealing to the administration in small, easily ignored groups.

The opposition to the merger will also be ignored if threatened students rely only on themselves.

The strike effort has always been open to new groups and new demands. If you oppose the merger, now is the time to join us.

­— atcrane@indiana.edu