Letters
Caution Necessary
Dear Sir,
It’s not a comfortable thing to speak up in defence of those convicted of sex offendences, but in the light of The Oxford Student’s sensationalist treatment of the case of the student who concealed his identity as a member of this most hated class of people, I feel the need to do so. Of course, the University should make itself aware of convictions and take appropriate measures to protect its members. Known sex offenders must be closely monitored.
But the ‘likely’ action of the University will apparently be to send down the student in question. This response, seemingly promoted in your editorial, would be quite disproportionate to the actual danger posed by someone guilty of downloading child pornography. Perhaps the point of the University expelling the student would be to send out a message that it does not tolerate such behaviour. This is a deeply worrying line of reasoning.
The criminal justice system is responsible for punishing individuals who do wrong; where citizens or indeed institutions such as universities impose sanctions for offences over and above what the courts decide is just, they are engaged in vigilantism.
Extra-judicial sanctions are contrary to due process and inevitably arbitrary: why should this student receive far greater punishment than a non-student offender incapable of being thrown out of university? Rehabilitation of serious offenders and prevention of reoffending is a perennial problem in society. From this perspective, the suggested response in this case " to take away the convict’s education" again seems particularly mindless.
It’s disappointing to see The Oxford Student play the part of the tabloid vigilante, goading the University into meting out the highest possible sanction in order to be seen to be insisting that Something Must Be Done.
Daniel Ward Balliol College
*The student concerned was convicted in open court. The Oxford Student would like to reiterate this and our belief that all students must be dealt with in accordance with the University statutes.*
In The Line Of Duty
Dear Sir,
Having also received Charles Brendon’s letter, I felt moved to reply as soon as possible. Whilst Mr Brendon is a past master at marshalling his argument in print to blow away all opposition, I am afraid his hypothesis about the shrinking size of The Oxford Student is incorrect. OSSL has aimed to keep the number of Zoo adverts, informing Oxford students of a service they haveasked their Student Union to provide, relatively similar week to week.
We produced an Oxide Radio pullout to advertise a new and exciting service to Oxford students (which they have also asked us to provide). Given the repeated calls by The Oxford Student for OUSU to improve its communication with students, I fail to see how Mr Brendon can disapprove of such a move.
Sadly, other parts of the paper have been shorter, but not as a direct consequence of the above; instead, it is the fact that of the five editions of The Oxford Student produced so far this term, precisely none of them have been finished on time. In order to avoid additional charges by our printers, we have thus reduced the number of pages that The Oxford Student staff are required to fill.
I simply do not agree that seeking to avoid increased charges from The Oxford Student’s printers, nor seeking to advertise the students the services they have requested from us, constitutes a dereliction of duty by OUSU in any sense at all.
John Blake OUSU President Chairperson Oxford Student Services Ltd.
Number-Crunching
Dear Sir,
I read with disappointment your editorial comment of last week (‘Funding Questions’) which branded Prof Neil Johnson’s research into the Eurovision song contest ‘unnecessary’. Prof Johnson is an authority on complex systems; that is, systems with many unpredictable interacting agents, of which the Eurovision song contest is one. Its widely celebrated tacky nature makes it no less a rich source of empirical data for understanding such systems than the financial markets, for example.
It is sadly often the case that the public deems scientific research frivolous or unnecessary when it appears to have no practical consequence. This is, to say the least, misguided, as the aim of science is to seek knowledge for its own sake. Furthermore, Prof Johnson arrived at his conclusions through scientific analysis of data and will no doubt use them in however small a way, to further our understanding of how complex systems behave.
As much as we revere Terry Wogan, he is not a leading figure in theoretical Physics.
Abhishek Majumdar LMH
*We received several letters on this subject. Many thanks to all our other correspondents.*
2nd Jun 2005