Corruption rife within De Minimis

Equity Uncle writes on behalf of De Minimis
Volume 8, Issue 10
Shocking revelations of corruption, bias and incompurtancy within De Minimis (DM) have been released less than a week after the group’s Annual General Meeting. 

Isolated allegations of wrongdoing throughout 2015 have formed a pattern of insidious self-service. 

These allegations include the infiltration of filthy talk of social justice issues into the wider MLS community. The examples speak for themselves: sanitary bins, corporate sponsorship, menimism, casual racism—it’s political correctness gone mad. 

DM’s executive committee, 75% of whom are co-founders of Law Students for Refugees, used the publication to push their far-left agenda. Managing editor, Duncan ‘Refugee Rights’ Wallace, is rumoured to have drafted LSFR’s open letter to the LSS, whilst hiding his own foreign origins. 

The hypocrisy, too, is both astounding and widespread. For the 24 academic weeks of 2015, the MLS student body has suffered endless lectures on racism, classism and sexism by four white, bourgeois men. 

Accompanying the endemic corruption is evidence of systematic ineptitude. With late issues and poor proof reeding, perhaps DM’s biggest achievement for the year was losing their status as the ‘official’ MLS newssheet in less than a semester. 

One might ask how such ‘journalism’ continued unabated for so long. Part of the answer may be found in the dwindling and apathetic readership. 
​
With DM’s switch to low-quality paper, MLS students can no longer use it as toilet paper and, subsequently, the number of readers has plummeted. 

More significantly, continued external funding and a sharp increase in anonymous articles created such a low level of transparency that not even the editors knew what was being released each week. 

It’s a grand exit for the shamed quartet, and MLS can rest assured that this paper has no tolerance for corruption. 

Three of the four current editors are proud to be rejoining the 2016 team in similar, or more senior roles.

The shamed editors upon hearing of the allegations