EDITORIAL ISSUE 6: APRIL/MAY 2026

Fighting for a politically engaged campus, a passionate readership.

The Canterbury Memo Issue 6 is not political, because if it were, it would be censored, or banned, or controlled. At least that’s the precedent being set by the university system. In reality, as a publication, we are immensely lucky to be entirely independent of the university and importantly the students’ association. It means we are not bound to a status quo and we are prepared to call out failures of the university and how they have let down the student body—our readers.

The recent case of racist cultural censorship at the Autumn Graduation Ceremony, where the wearing of keffiyeh was banned for “promoting protest”, adds to a growing list of examples of how freedom of expression and student dissent are threatened. Our short exposé on campus depoliticisation, corporatisation, and overt oppression are only part of a far wider picture of what’s happening at UC and across universities in the West. After collecting and reviewing cases brought to us by students about their experiences on campus with UC Security, it is safe to say that something has to change. The university has a responsibility to rein in their seemingly uncontrollable militia. Read: page 08.

In better news, however, we won’t be going anywhere for the time being. We have been able to renew our license to keep our magazine stand in UC’s Undercroft, unfettered and safe from the hands of security. We will always fight for accessible and equitable distribution of the Memo, without ever compromising our editorial stance. 

Elsewhere…

Last month, I received a letter from a reader in response to the work we published in Issue 5. Feedback on the editorial direction of this magazine is something I take seriously. This publication has a vital function to diversify student media—which as this issue explores, is something we need—and create a platform for meaningful discussion on political, social, and environmental issues. Our piece from Issue 5 on US imperialism generated debate. This reader suggested that the article may not have been up to the standard of analysis and research that the Memo holds itself to. We stand by the ethos of the piece, and we are confident our readers do too, however this reaction was shared by other members of our readership. As such, we are publishing an expanded response, which engages with the topic in more depth, revisiting the original author’s argument while addressing nuances that were overlooked. You can find this thorough historical exploration of the US Empire on page 15.

It bears noting that the lack of a crossword in this issue, however, is a result of a page space, not this letter’s feedback... You can read this reader’s letter in full on page 5. Please get in touch to submit your own feedback or general opinions. This is the people’s magazine, its editorial direction and evolution is shaped by its readers. 

The response from Issue 5 was certainly not all critical, however. We have never received more pitches and offers of contribution following a release. The engagement from keen readers and prospective writers, from Ōtautahi and beyond, was truly heartwarming. Further than that, donations began to roll in. While we didn’t quite reach our funding target for this issue (hence the slightly-lighter-than-usual issue), the generous community support means so much and nonetheless helps keep us running. Every dollar goes to printing and making the magazine free to read for everyone. It means we are entirely accountable to our readership and community. Thank you.

Joseph Davidson-Labout

Founding Editor, The Canterbury Memo

www.memozine.nz / editor.thememo@gmail.com

ISSUE 6: APRIL/MAY 2026

CHIEF EDITOR

Joseph Davidson-Labout

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Mathieu Ali

Gavin Dee

Grace Robinson

FEATURE WRITERS

Dan Burgess-Milne

Jimmy Gully

CJ Maglaqui

Grace Robinson

August

CARTOON

@brushandsickle

IN COLLABORATION WITH

Peace Action Ōtautahi

SJP Canterbury