Administration failed to keep students informed in pivotal moment of presidential search

SF State seems eager to find new ways to yet again fail to include students in the new presidential search.

The University hosted the first and only public forum to discuss the selection of presidential candidates Monday, Feb. 20.

For an event with this kind of significance, it is more likely that the 31,990 students that missed out did so not because they did not care, but because they did not know about it.

According to California State University spokeswoman Stephanie Thara, it is the school’s responsibility to publicize the event.

If you ask the SF State University communications department whose responsibility this is, you will get another story.

Spokeswoman Nan Broadbent noted that, “The chancellor’s office’s job is to run the entire search. The chancellor’s office does everything.”

Broadbent also expressed that the University “felt good” about the efforts that were made to publicize the meeting, stating, “we felt we had covered all the bases.”

“My understanding is that the measures we took were the right measures to take,” said Broadbent.

If administrators consider a turnout of 10 students out of 32,000 a success, they would probably struggle to pass basic math classes at their own universities.

SF State’s feeble attempts to “publicize” this important gathering included sending an email to faculty and staff, posting a bulletin on the University website and sending a few meager sentences to a local wire service, who chose not to publish the story.

You cannot call yourself a communication department if you are unwilling to communicate.

There are a multitude of things the University could’ve done to make the meeting more visible and accessible to students.

The University chose to host the meeting in the Seven Hills Conference Center, a very removed and little-known part of campus, instead of selecting a central and visible campus venue like any of the various conference accommodations in the Cesar Chavez Student Center.

There should be some attempt made to reach students directly, and SF State already has the tools in place to do so.

During a brief power outage Feb. 17, students were inundated with emails, texts and voicemails from the University alerting them of the issue. For this event that affected a mere 30 minutes of students’ lives, the University unleashed an arsenal of information. But for a decision that could change the face of SF State for the next twenty years or more—silence.

The University cannot blame this failure on student apathy if students were never given a chance to be apathetic in the first place.