The Executive Board values freedom of the press, as stated in the email sent to the TU/e community on October 6, and we, the editors of Cursor, greatly appreciate that. We are very happy to continue the conversation from this shared starting point. The first thing we would like to know from the board members is: do they also believe that Cursor is able to practice independent journalism?

Unfortunately, the statute in its current form does not contribute to Cursor’s journalistic freedom. Furthermore, no consensus has ever been reached on the content of the guideline the Executive Board refers to. Feedback from the editorial team was not incorporated and no agreement was reached on a final version. Therefore, we do not consider this document to be valid.

To safeguard Cursor’s journalistic freedom, it is essential that a new statute should include only journalistic principles (such as ensuring that both sides of the argument are heard). Qualifications like balance and the information needs of the TU/e community are not objective or measurable, which means that they can be used at any time - also for the purpose of complicating less positive reporting. And we believe that that is what happened. The Executive Board’s extensive statement reaffirms this; in it, the board substantiates the rejection of the Cursor article about the rector with the argument that “the article did not fit the objective of Cursor, particularly because the required balance was not sufficiently ensured.”

We do our work with the best of intentions and with the utmost integrity. Still, as journalists, we are by no means perfect. So we want to state upfront that everyone is allowed to have an opinion about our articles. As editors, we welcome criticism; both on our website in columns and in open discussions afterwards. Continuous self-reflection is important to maintain and improve the quality of our articles. However, things like appropriate balance, wording, size of an article, readers’ information needs or timing of publication are all inherently subjective and immeasurable. So, while any and all opinions not based on factual inaccuracies or other journalistic principles are welcome, they should never be a reason to obstruct the publication of articles.

Pressure

Despite the Executive Board’s claim that no improper pressure was exerted, the editors - in particular the general editor - unfortunately did experience such pressure. The fact that the Executive Board had been questioning his position (since November 2021) influenced his decisions not to publish several articles and to accept the editorial board members proposed by the Executive Board.

The pressure on general editor Han Konings consistently followed discussions surrounding articles, even when Konings decided not to publish. Therefore, the Cursor editors do not consider these things - including the removal of Han Konings from his position - to be unrelated. Sidelining the general editor was completely unnecessary and we would like to see Konings’ removal from post reversed.

In conclusion

Quality journalism - which is intrinsically fair - serves an important signaling function within society and also within a public institution like TU/e. Journalism can pinpoint where things go wrong. The people who turn to us with a far-reaching story have one thing in common: they have had a lot of doors shut in their faces.

Therefore, the Cursor editors greatly appreciate that the Executive Board has spoken out in favor of freedom of the press and critical reporting. After all, what matters in the end is not a better story about the university, but a better university.