First of all, all print advertising is declining, which means the Hoya could be caught up in a larger trend. At a time when the editors of the Times and Journal are talking (albeit theoretically) about a “public assistance” model for the press industry, is the Hoya really in a position to claim invulnerability?

Second of all, after the non-compete agreement of independence expires, the university could promote another paper which would grow and compete with the Hoya (for example, the Voice would get more resources, which could in turn hurt the Hoya).

Third of all, the Hoya could lose some prestige as a result of no longer being officially affiliated with the university (even if it retains the name and “Newspaper of Record” slogan).

Fourth of all, the Hoya would have added expenses, such as the need to pay insurance, pay competitive prices for rent (let’s not pretend renting from Georgetown is the same as renting space on M Street), possibly even start paying its staff as it has always said it wanted to do.

Fifth of all, the Hoya could lose some resiliency. All clubs are cyclical, with good years and bad. Going independent could hurt the Hoya’s ability to recover from a few bad years, financially and in terms of student interest. The Hoya has had disastrous financial years this decade – and yes The Hoya’s leaders call it an aberration, but it could only take one more “aberration” sometime in the next 20 years to sink the paper.

The list goes on. Like it or not, the university provided a lot of security for the Hoya, and, as many alums of The Hoya (such as myself) point out, there’s a risk that the Hoya could fail and not have anybody there to catch it. (Unless you want GUSA to bail it out, like the Carnegie-Mellon student govt bailed out their paper after it went independent and flopped!)

Perhaps a larger point is that yes, The Hoya has been profitable the last few years. But that’s just it — it’s only been profitable the very last few years, during the height of the economic boom. The Hoya’s first profit was only a few years ago, and the number of years it’s been profitable can still be counted on two hands. It’s not like it’s been profitable for 10 years, much less 20, much less 50, much less 90. Five or six years of profitability doesn’t provide a strong case for future profitability, much less guarantee it.

And lastly, this whole argument that the Hoya “deserves” its independence because it “earned” all the money it got and it deserves to “keep its earnings” is a farce. The Hoya was a financial ward of the university for the first 80 years of its existence, and it’s been subsidized by the university and by the student body for most of a century, up until just these last few years. The idea that just because it became profitable for a few years during the boom period means that it “deserves” its earnings is ludicrous. Perhaps this sense of self-aggrandizement, self-congratulation, and lack of perspective is why so many alums of The Hoya are skeptical of the short-sighted independence movement.

I’m all for a free press, but let’s face it, this isn’t about freedom of the press. Georgetown doesn’t censor the Hoya, and even if it were independent the university would retain censorship ability via the licensing of the name, the authorization of distribution points on campus, and the sanctioning of student participation. If anything, the Hoya going independent could lead to greater pressure by ultra-Catholics for the university to reject outright the “independent” voice of the paper. It probably has more freedom as university property than it would if it were independent.

Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s not about a “free press,” it’s about money. I’m an alum of The Hoya, and everybody who works there knows as much. I’m not saying I’m entirely against independence, but it’s not the paper’s birthright and it isn’t even the biggest issue.

Terribly misinformed. The university doesn’t funnel a single dime or advertiser, etc., to The Hoya. The staff works with ad agencies and has contacts with past and potential advertisers much like any business. Come on, you really think Georgetown has some bureaucrat in charge of funneling ads to the student paper?

The real question is why any so-called student or professor would want to be on something as Orwellian as to be named the “media board.”

From a free speech standpoint, the April fools issue can’t be defended. But what would happen if the newspaper wrote a story that offended students but was legitimate, accurate, fairly reported–which campus editors reasonably aim for on all of the other 50-odd non-satirical newspaper issues that it publishes. If you don’t like the newspaper’s coverage, hey, make enough noise to the Media Board.

Why the heck would Georgetown want to have this burden to deal with? If the paper was independent and students were unhappy with editorial decisions, the university would have a much better response: you don’t like it, it’s not our problem. Don’t complain to us, talk to their advertisers.

I used to do judo with a prof from GW and he thought our attempt at independence was hysterical because even he knew Georgetown would try as hard as possible to kill it while saving face. Sad.

And, “Huh”,
Ads do not get into The Hoya like that. Advertisers approach The Hoya or a middleman, or The Hoya approaches those parties.

and J. Stuef, I think that your argument that if they really wanted to punish the Hoya, they’d make them change their name is a bit beside the point. The issue with the name isn’t the most important — by staying part of the university and using the name, they at least remain answerable to the university. If they were independent and licensed the name, the university wouldn’t have any recourse but pulling that license. (This would potentially break the contract, and if it didn’t then I could see the Hoya still claiming this power = de facto censorship.)

There’s a difference between letting them keep the name but not giving them independence and letting them license the name once they’re independent. It’s not as simple as “do they have the name or not.” I really don’t think the university’s actions should be seen as that controversial, and I’m usually very anti-university and pro-Hoya independence.