A RACE ROW has erupted between senior University officials over comments made about Tim Ngwena, YUSU’s first black president.
Pro Vice Chancellor for Students Jane Grenville made the remarks in relation to a video featuring Ngwena.
YUSU have slammed her comments as “scandalous”.
The row emerged after Vision interviewed Jane Grenville about her actions during the production of a promotional film made by YSTV for the University Council.
DECEIVED
Tim Ngwena was misled to believe he was approached to be interviewed because of his experience with societies.
But Grenville shockingly admitted to Vision, that he had been purposely given the wrong impression – he was chosen because he was black.
“That’s why we put Tim in,” she said. “It’s difficult to walk up to someone and say ‘can we interview you because of the colour of your skin’.”
Grenville had asked YSTV to interview a random selection of students about the University and what worried them.
However, when she saw the final cut Grenville demanded that YSTV do the video again because she thought it gave the illusion of a “white middle-class mafia” and did not reflect the ethnic diversity on campus.
Her comments over Ngwena have enraged YUSU who say he was totally unaware of the true reason for the interview.
In a joint statement, YUSU sabbatical officers said: “There are many good reasons for having Tim in this video: he is an award-winning student entrepreneur, a recipient of the York Award, a successful charity event organiser and a popular president.”
“The colour of his skin is not one of these reasons however. It is bad enough that University Council should be misled with scripted monologues presented as true reflections of students’ views; that the candidacy for these videos should be based on race rather than merit, however, is nothing short of scandalous.”
CENSORED
The allegations of “scripted monologues” came after it was revealed that Grenville also censored comments and views that featured in the original video.
“There were complaints that were directed specifically at two departments,” said Grenville, when asked to explain her actions.
“They were not appropriate to be brought up in front of Council, which is a governing body there to deal with strategy.”
SCRIPTED
With YSTV stretched to such a tight deadline, the end film featured YSTV members who were instructed about what they must say.
This included one YSTV member talking about how good the welfare system was at the University, put in at Grenville’s request after she was disappointed that none of the original students interviewed had mentioned it.
Alex, a YSTV member who featured in the video saying lines he was instructed to say, commented: “At the time I didn’t think anything of it, but in retrospect it seems pretty outrageous. How can you claim the video represented what students thought, if most of it was scripted?”
ENGAGED
University Council is a governing body that makes decisions about the running of the University. It is made up of internal staff and elected or co-opted members from outside of the institution.
“The film went down well with them because they liked the feeling that they engaged with students,” said Grenville.
Photos: Daniel Birchinall (Tim Ngwena) and Anne-Marie Canning (Jane Grenville)
So, they wanted a video that didn’t make our university look incredibly white and middle class. Big deal.
The bigger issue is that the video was scripted.
It would have been useful to give some statistics for the ‘make-up’ of the student populace so that the reader could place Jane Grenville’s comments in context. My initial thought was that it probably would be more accurate a representation to have largely ‘white’ people in the film, if less politically correct, but on reflection this could be wrong. Certainly Grenville should have been clear about her thinking to Ngwena, who could then have objected.
Also the subheader ‘Decieved’ is spelt incorrectly – ‘… except after c’ guys. I would have refrained from being so pedantic but Michael Regan pointed out some mistakes in a comment elsewhere.
I think that whilst there is evidently a massive problem with the video being scripted, and it raises questions about how much those on the council actually know about the day to day running of, and student experience at york, I’m with Michael.
Lying to Tim Ngwena was completely unacceptable- I don’t honestly believe for one minute that Jane Grenville is a racist, but I think she betrays an unfortunate attitude, that is seemingly ingrained in the management at the university.
Take for example, the story reported in Vision a few issues back, in which a black student was approached for a photograph for the prospesctus, and automatically his photo was used in the ‘International section’. He’s a home student. The university claimed that the photos were randomly selected for each section, however, it’s clear that using lacrosse pictures in the ‘sports’ section isn’t all that random.
The two separate stories, seemingly unrelated, suggest to me at least something a tad concerning about how this university WANTS to be perceived. Do they (and I mean the council and Jane Grenville here too) think that there is some sort of institutional racism going on, that they need to cover up or soften? Otherwise, why have the film remade? If they genuinely don’t believe they are excluding black students, then why would they see a need to prove inclusion?
The phrase ‘white middle-class mafia’ carries too many conspiratorial connotations but York’s student body is overwhelmingly white and middle-class, as is the case at most European universities! Most of the non-white students are postgrads from overseas rather than working-class black people from large British cities.