What is believed to be the only student-run Native American magazine in the country will no longer be part of the UA’s American Indian Studies Department.
About six months after Red Ink magazine published its 20th anniversary issue, its managing editor received a notice on Tuesday, Aug. 2, that the department will no longer sponsor or oversee production of the magazine.
No one is more shocked by the decision than the magazine’s managing editor, Joseph Quintana Ramirez, a UA grad student and member of the Santo Domingo Pueblo, who joined the Red Ink staff in 2009. The last time the Tucson Weekly talked to Ramirez, he and the other student volunteers were excited the anniversary issue was finally going to press after the students raised more than $5,000 to pay for production and promotion materials. (See “Part of the Conversation,” March 10.)
Ramirez says he was surprised to learn that the AIS Department had concerns about Red Ink, because they’d never come up in previous conversations. “People have said to me, ‘You’ve got to have seen this coming,’ but really I didn’t.”
The letter of severance was signed by Ronald L. Trosper, the new AIS head. Trosper told the Weekly that there were some discussions about severing ties with the magazine before he became the head of the department.
“I am new at the department, but this change came on the advice of the previous department head (Joseph Hiller). I felt I was carrying out what had already been discussed,” Trosper says.
“There are specific issues we shared in the (severance) letter. First, we had a record number of errors and not giving credit to authors” in the last issue. “Second, we don’t have a faculty member who wants to support them (as a faculty adviser). Third, we’re concerned that students, when they prioritize, choose Red Ink over their academic work. Of course, they are free to do that, but I don’t think AIS should put the distraction in front of them. It’s a distraction we should not support.”
Trosper says the final concern is controlling costs. AIS donated $2,500 for the 20th anniversary issue, but the full-color glossy magazine ended up costing $8,000 to publish. “We’ve contributed funds, and they’ve also raised funds, but I haven’t seen a financial report,” Trosper says.
On Wednesday, Aug. 3, Trosper met with Ramirez, along with student volunteers and AIS students Ashley Tsosie-Mahieu and Johnny Nelson. Ramirez says that AIS officials want the magazine out of its office space on Helen Street by Sept. 15. “We have to inventory our magazines and equipment, and find storage. That’s not enough time,” Ramirez says.
Trosper told the students he’d work with them on the move-out date. Also, an e-mail he sent to all AIS students makes it seem like there may be room for negotiations that could keep Red Ink within the AIS Department, rather than as a student club, as Trosper originally suggested.
In the e-mail, which the AIS Department head shared with the Weekly, he apologized to the students for not discussing the concerns before sending the letter to Ramirez.
“I apologized for not doing so, and I have offered to meet further to discuss the matter, which can go as far as reconsidering the decision,” he wrote.
However, Ramirez says he hasn’t received anything directly from Trosper that says the department could be reconsidering the severance. He also questions Trosper’s concerns, particularly the claim that involvement in Red Ink is preventing academic progress of student volunteers. “We have several staff members who maintain 4.0 averages,” he says.
One of the corrections Trosper refers to was the magazine’s failure to cite an author who didn’t submit a biography for the anniversary issue. “We were trying to work to correct it, but before we could, the department had written (the writer) back that they were going to correct it,” Ramirez says.
Regarding costs, Ramirez says Red Ink did receive $2,500 in support from the AIS Department, but the remaining money to publish and promote the anniversary issue was raised by the student editorial board.
“I never heard displeasure, like, ‘We don’t like your practices or how you’re spending money,'” Ramirez says.
Red Ink‘s severance comes after a tumultuous period for the AIS Department. This spring, some Native American students complained that a graduate-assistantship position was always going to non-Native American students when equally qualified Native American students were passed up.
Ramirez says he didn’t get deeply involved in the issue. However, one day in May, he showed up just as the department was having a town hall meeting to discuss the GA appointment policy. Later, Ramirez says, he was notified that he was being investigated for bullying and intimidation—even though he merely showed up to that meeting and voiced his concerns.
He’s since been cleared of the allegations, but the issue delayed him from completing his graduate degree. The allegations, according to Ramirez, came from outgoing AIS department head Hiller and associate professor Franci Washburn.
In an e-mail to the Weekly, Hiller says that Red Ink‘s future has been a part of department discussions going back six years, but the corrections on the 20th anniversary issue “with quality control problems, non-responsiveness with regard to corrective action and legal liabilities probably provided some momentum for the letter.”
Regarding the graduate-assistantship controversy, Hiller wrote, “In this case, a non-Indian was appointed. A few students made a fuss about that, and their behavior/conduct got a little out of hand. Thus the complaints by students and faculty; and investigations conducted by the dean of students.”
Hiller wrote that he met with faculty members and wrote a memo to clarify the selection criteria, which include academic achievement and writing ability. “The faculty (members) do not and cannot discriminate in these decisions based on protected categories of gender, race or veterans’ status. Incredibly, some students feel otherwise.”
This article appears in Aug 11-17, 2011.
My name is Ashley Tsosie-Mahieu (Navajo). I am a representative of Red Ink, and I am entering my second year as a Ph.D. Student in American Indian Studies. There are a couple of clarifications that I want to make:
First, the original severance letter dated August 1, 2011 (and emailed to Joseph Quintana Ramirez on August 2, 2011) did not include any reasons for the AIS split with RED INK. Ramirez, Johnny Nelson, and I were given the reasons during a meeting with Dr. Trosper and two other AIS staff members. These issues were not communicated to us prior to the August 3rd meeting. During this meeting, the error in our Anniversary issue was discussed, but nothing was mentioned about a “record number of errors.”
Trosper also indicated in his remarks to Tucson Weekly that AIS does not have a faculty advisor to provide to RED INK. In speaking with him at the August 3rd meeting, it was clear that he did not ask all faculty members if they were interested in being advisors to RED INK. He also said that he would actively dissuade AIS faculty to be advisors to RED INK.
The third reason that Trosper provided for the split is that RED INK is a distraction from duties as a student. This overgeneralized statement signifies that Trosper has not made connections with students involved in RED INK (and those not involved in RED INK). Most, if not all of us, are in good academic standing. Most, if not all of us, prioritize our educational duties over other responsibilities: RED INK, work, organizations, and even family. We know how to effectively manage our time; we are all adults. If distractions are really a concern, the workload of graduate teaching assistantships (GTAs) in the AIS Program should be scrutinized.
During the August 3rd meeting, I asked Trosper if any student input was considered in the AIS decision to sever ties with RED INK. He replied no. It is very disconcerting that such a hasty decision would be made without the inclusion of student voices, those in RED INK and those not in RED INK.
Lastly, I want to address Dr. Hiller’s comments about the graduate teaching assistantship controversy. Hiller writes: “A few students made a fuss about that, and their behavior/conduct got a little out of hand.” In this case, “a few students” is approximately half of last year’s incoming Ph.D. cohort with many other continuing students who were displeased with the selection of this particular GTA appointment. Overwhelmingly, this group of displeased students is Native. This issue is not one that is as simple as Hiller’s dismissive language implies.
Hiller’s statement about student behavior/conduct does not accurately describe the actions of the students unless “[getting] out of hand” means questioning the policies and practices of the AIS Program and seeking out advice from the Dean of Students. As graduate students, we are supposed to be critical thinkers. We are supposed to develop the skills to interrogate the actions of those in power, to critique injustices done to Native peoples, communities, and nations. When we see injustices occurring in our own backyard, are we just supposed to ignore it?
As someone who has subscribed to Red Ink in the past, I am sorry to read this story. I have to say that I’m not surprised, however. I no longer subscribe because Red Ink was not run professionally. I did not receive issues I paid for. Email inquirys about my subscription were never answered.
I understand that this is a student-run publication. That’s partly why I subscribed. I’m a teacher myself and I wanted to give these young folks a chance. Red Ink is doing very creative work, or so I gather since I rarely received what I subscribed to support. Students have to learn that if they can’t run the distribution part of their operation professionally, they lose subscribers, too.