Editorial

An apology

Last term, a Catnip article was published that led to hurt and offence from several members of the Imperial community. Whilst we would typically name the offending issue and article, I have elected not to, to prevent the article from gaining notoriety, as well as fanning the flames of "discussion", where Felix readers would elect to pick a side and argue vociferously about who was in the right. Ultimately, it doesn't matter. The article came across very badly, and was perceived to target the LGBTQ+ community, despite the authors of the article being a part of the community themselves. In essence, it was a joke in poor taste that made light of things that didn't need to be joked about, and for that, I, and Felix, apologise.

To ensure that this doesn't happen again, we've implemented a secondary sense check for Catnip articles in the future. Typically, I copyedit Catnip articles and sense check to ensure we don't push the envelope into offence or gross obscenity, but from now on a secondary editor will check in case I miss something out.

From Issue 1871

9th May 2025

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

Read more

Supreme Court rules “ragebait” is valid legal defence

Catnip

Supreme Court rules “ragebait” is valid legal defence

The UK’s highest court sided with Imperial students in two out of three crucial test cases focusing on crimes that involved “ragebaiting”. The decision reversed earlier court rulings that denied the possibility of ragebaiting as a plausible and honest reason for harmful and destructive acts. Previously, these offences only

By NegaFelix and Juby Roy