With the recall saga finally over and the results of the ASUC general elections coming out tomorrow, the university news team would like to take a moment to reflect on this semester’s ASUC elections coverage.

The General Elections

During the ASUC General Elections, we often faced questions as to how to provide in-depth coverage of the candidates while still providing enough background information for new freshman and transfers experiencing their first elections seasons. The issue of including joke candidates in articles about ASUC Executive Offices also posed issues—should we even cover a candidate whose major platform is building a fence? Or do we owe it to our readers to provide equal coverage of all candidates listed on the ballot?

This year we tried to focus our profiles of candidates around issues pivotal to that office, while making mention of their other platforms as well. However, we are still unsure of whether this is in fact the best policy—as it sometimes kept us from focusing on issues that greatly differentiate candidates.

Covering the senatorial race is also more or less a nightmare, given that nearly a hundred students generally compete for the 20 seats within the ASUC senate, making it impossible for us to become familiar with or run articles about them all. This year, we ran a two-part feature on elections and campaigning that focused largely on this unique race and a few of its candidates, in the hopes of clearing up some of the process and showing the perspective of candidates and their potential constituents. However, we largely left it up to students to do more extensive research on the individual candidates.

In previous years, there have also been many cases filed with the ASUC Judicial Council alleging elections violations (including illegal chalking), and in some cases disqualifying candidates or even entire parties. This year, no such violations have yet been filed in the general elections—but the special recall election this February proved to be a different story.

The Recall

At the start of the semester, the ASUC Senate was already embroiled in the process of recalling a senator, an issue that was highly contested and poorly outlined in the ASUC Constitution. But although the process to hold a recall election drained countless hours and $20,000 from the senate’s budget, it turned out that many students just weren’t all that interested. As the criticism, complications and Judicial Council suits added up, we struggled to balance in-depth coverage of an unprecedented recall with its relative marginality compared to other campus news.

As attested by the low turnout in the recall election—3,710 of a 35,000 student body—relegating the recall to the front page was not always the smartest choice.

Another challenge we faced was the large number of late-night ASUC Judicial Council rulings on the recall, which forced the news team to make difficult judgments of their importance before they occurred. Although each case had a 50/50 chance of stopping the recall in its tracks—a verdict that would have deserved a front-page headline—they all ultimately ended in favor of holding an election, albeit one delayed by months of controversy. By March, many of the rulings had lost their original importance and would have been better left for a final wrap-up.

We were also forced to balance our coverage with an inability to provide all the evidence to the student body, after former senator John Moghtader decided to show The Daily Californian a video of the events of November 13. The video, which showed Moghtader standing in the corner of an Eshleman Hall balcony while a fight broke out and contradicted allegations of assault by senior Dina Omar, had not been released to the public. However much we wanted to get the raw footage out into the open, the best we could do was let readers know we had seen the video and offer as detailed a description of it as possible.

Our coverage of such a controversial issue has received criticism both for its portrayal of the recall and its focus on side issues rather than the roots of the recall effort. Throughout the process, we strove to keep students updated on the latest rulings and milestones while providing enough background information to explain why these details were important. In the end, we think we brought all key issues to light. Our coverage sparked important campus dialogue over what it means to recall an elected official, and ultimately provided some perspective on the function and responsibilities of the ASUC Senate.

Any feedback or constructive criticism of our coverage is welcome, so feel free to comment or e-mail us at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

- Rachel Gross (University News Editor) and Valerie Woolard (Asst. University News Editor)