Being Comment Editor for Varsity is an interesting role because the remit is so open. To comment on things relevant to students, or which students are interested in. Aside from the seemingly unending stream of spam emails advertising everything from belly-fat loss and an improved sex life to buying conservatory windows and saving various kidnapping victims which come through to our email account, we receive a whole array of interesting pitches. They are often heartfelt, personal, but also profound and politically astute.

The emails come in flurries. With the anti-Semitic comments flying around Malia Bouattia, we read email after email, each offering a distinct perspective on the NUS drama. It truly makes one appreciate how multi-faceted any political decision is in a university like Cambridge. People wanted to write about the LGBT+ perspective, the BME one, the Jewish angle. But the noteworthy point here is that there wasn’t and isn’t a singular perspective for any of these viewpoints, but rather a whole spectrum of opinion.

The advantage of Varsity is that it is willing to platform this whole spectrum of viewpoints. We are not a newspaper with a fixed ideology, giving us an intellectual freedom to explore whichever views the editors, writers, and readers are interested in. Earlier this term, one of my Deputy Editors asked if there was a Varsity ‘line’ on some particular issue, and I was delighted to be able tell him that there wasn’t. Aside from avoiding overt racism/ sexism/ homophobia etc., we are merely committed to publishing good writing and clever ideas. Part of the fun is editing an article which strongly voices an opinion on a student issue, and the day after publishing its opposite.

The spirit of the Comment section, then, operates to open up ideas, and provoke thought. The motivations of our writers go far beyond a solipsistic desire to see themselves in print or disseminate their own views, but rather are led by a dedication to debate. I am always touched by the devotion, the hours people put in to writing their articles and going over edits to get the last comma right.

This debate, too, is not confined to a narrow range of topics. From personal experiences of mental health issues and alcohol abuse to in-depth analysis of American politics and Syria, the wealth of subjects on which the Cambridge student body can offer insight and understanding always amazes me. I think the Comment section therefore provides a means for readers to better understand sectors outside their own experience.

And yet Comment is not merely concerned with the conferring of understanding. To comment is often considered a passive role, of responding to and analysing external events. Particularly as played out in the microcosm of Cambridge, Comment articles have a real capacity to take an active role in altering reality, in changing the subject upon which they comment. We saw this with the Class Lists debate, and again with the NUS drama, as we published a series of articles exploring a range of perspectives. As these articles were shared and discussed on social media and in person, they flagged up important considerations and led the debate in new directions. I like to think that Varsity played a role in provoking debate around the NUS referendum, leading to record voter turnout.

This year has been one in which the role of the print newspaper – and by extension, student journalism as a whole – has been challenged. With the end of the print Independent, and, more locally, the cutting of the TCS budget, the place in society of a printed newspaper has been challenged, especially as we can now check the news continually on a whole array of phone apps. The role of long-form analysis as a means of journalism, too, has perhaps been seen as more precarious. With sites like BuzzFeed attracting mass markets with listicles and GIFs, and social media meaning anyone can comment on anything, anywhere, anytime, the traditional role of the broadsheet’s editorials and commentary has been destabilised.
And yet, the important point, perhaps, is that it prevails. Readers remain. Despite the pessimistic predicaments for journalism’s future, it is very telling that in moments of political importance, such as the upcoming EU referendum, we turn to these published writings as voices of authority. Opinion, in short, is still valued, and always will be – not as something which can be automated or generated by the general public, but rather as a form which requires more time, knowledge and specialism.

The role of the editor in this process is a balance between preserving the original style and voice of the writer, while making changes to better express that meaning and meet a generalised style of Varsity comment writing. This poses problems when the writer expresses a set of ideas very different to your own, and it perhaps becomes an unconscious response to add more hedging (“I think…”, “it seems to me”) to these pieces. Having said that, processing such a large volume of articles means I have become more sensitive to the inevitable idiosyncrasies of different writers, and learnt to be more respectful of those who want to say ‘that’ where I would put ‘which’, or who have more of a penchant for the semi-colon. In Comment, the point is that neither opinion nor style is homogenous.

Applications for Section Editors for Michaelmas are now open. For more information please visit http://www.varsity.co.uk/get-involved